Gil, I don't know what version of Pascal you were using but it wasn't any that I know about!
The assignment operator is ":=" i.e nNumber1:=2; nNumber2:=3; as per VFP you can use =, >, <, <>, <= and >= to compare things but not the "!=" combination. Dave Crozier -----Original Message----- From: profox-boun...@leafe.com [mailto:profox-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of Gil Hale Sent: 20 February 2009 15:29 To: profox@leafe.com Subject: RE: Reading/writing to a Progress database from VFP9SP2 Perhaps my memory is not recalling correctly, but the use of "!=" in PASCAL means "is equal to", as opposed to "=", which is a value assignment operator. Under the assumption my recollection is correct I merely did a flip-back on the use of != in xBase which is "not equal to" as opposed to PASCAL's != "equals". The point was to each their own. I see PostgreSQL as making Progress, although I still find VFP extremely capable and useful. Despite the advantages of PostgreSQL over VFP as a database solution, as well as the others I had mentioned, and PostgreSQL representing Progress in my world, I recognize for others it may not be viewed the same way. Sorry for any confusion re: my position. For me the choice is clear for a RDBMS solution for a robust and highly scalable back end solution, PostgreSQL. For lighter duty fare and legacy apps I still like using VFP7/VFP9. And, for the record, yes, I did merely skim the initial post. My bad... Wars have been started over lesser excuses <g>. Gil > -----Original Message----- > From: profoxtech-boun...@leafe.com > [mailto:profoxtech-boun...@leafe.com]on Behalf Of MB Software Solutions > General Account > Sent: Friday, February 20, 2009 8:24 AM > To: profoxt...@leafe.com > Subject: Re: Reading/writing to a Progress database from VFP9SP2 > > > Gil Hale wrote: > > I have done some work with VFP and PostgreSQL, and found it to be quite > easy > > to work with. My needs were quite simple, so I have not bothered to cut > any > > of my commercial apps over to PostgreSQL for a back end. But for what I > > needed (large database tables using parameterized views in VFP against > > PostgreSQL tables) the solution worked well. That way I could > look at the > > section of the database tables I needed without exceeding the > VFP 2Gb limit > > for files (including temp cursor files). The largest PostgreSQL table I > was > > accessing that was was over 16Gb. Worked like a charm. > > > > Be certain to get some good books on PostgreSQL. The is one called > > PostgreSQL For Windows that I found most useful in the Windows OS > platforms. > > All other books refer briefly to Windows, but focus more on Linux - > which at > > the time was not of interst to me. Also be certain to get familiar with > > PGAdmin III to help manage and set up your database(s). My > next large step > > is to migrate to PostgreSQL on a Linux Server just for the connectivity > > without the CAL pricing. > > > Gil, > > Did you mean to say PROGRESS instead of PostgreSQL? Re-read my post. > I'm not looking to connect to PostgreSQL, but PROGRESS. My client has > it, probably as part of his MAS 200 package (which he's not happy with, > and said "I can't tell you how much I've spent on this thing" --- and I > know I could have built his something to serve his needs for far LESS > I'll bet!). > > > > [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/991dcd5dd2be455e9f18d5ec3e037...@develop ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
