On 2021-01-29, at 11:32:46, John P. Hartmann wrote:
>
> In general, pipes are forgiving and accepts a wider gamut of options than the
> documentation specifies.
>
> The documentation is written to be comprehensible and flowing (in authors'
> argot), if it were to show all possible combinations
In general, pipes are forgiving and accepts a wider gamut of options
than the documentation specifies.
The documentation is written to be comprehensible and flowing (in
authors' argot), if it were to show all possible combinations of options
and what not, it would, certainly in the case of loo
riday, 29 January 2021 13:43
To: CMS-PIPELINES@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [CMS-PIPELINES] Lookup with floor
Caution! External email. Do not open attachments or click links, unless
this email comes from a known sender and you know the content is safe.
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 at 12:48,
S-PIPELINES@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: [CMS-PIPELINES] Lookup with floor
Caution! External email. Do not open attachments or click links, unless this
email comes from a known sender and you know the content is safe.
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 at 12:48, John P. Hartmann wrote:
> There is somethin
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 at 14:23, John P. Hartmann wrote:
> lookup floor 1
>
> I must have been busy at the time in 2003.
>
Probably in a hurry to finish it for my birthday ;-)
Be sure to retain the output at the end:
lookup MASTER DETAIL.
There is only one test case for each of CEILING/FLOOR. E.g.,
lookup floor 1
I must have been busy at the time in 2003.
On 1/29/21 13:53, Rob van der Heij wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 at 13:45, Alain Benvéniste wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 at 13:45, Alain Benvéniste wrote:
> Do I open a issue for that ?
>
If you don't, I will put it on the list and eventually roll it into a
future upgrade.
Sir Rob the Plumber
Do I open a issue for that ?
Le 29/01/2021 13:43, « CMSTSO Pipelines Discussion List au nom de Rob van der
Heij » a écrit :
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 at 12:48, John P. Hartmann wrote:
> There is something wrong here. LOOR is not a valid range, so F should
> not be recognised as a abbr
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 at 12:48, John P. Hartmann wrote:
> There is something wrong here. LOOR is not a valid range, so F should
> not be recognised as a abbreviation of FIELD, but it certainly looks
> like that is what is happening.
>
It sure has bitten me before that LOOKUP was picky on the orde
There is something wrong here. LOOR is not a valid range, so F should
not be recognised as a abbreviation of FIELD, but it certainly looks
like that is what is happening.
On 1/29/21 12:35, Ronald van der Laan wrote:
Alain,
I guess that with the second field definition, the F from FLOOR is no
Met vriendelijke groet/With kind regards/Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
> Berry van Sleeuwen
> Flight Forum 3000 5657 EW Eindhoven
>
> -Original Message-
> From: CMSTSO Pipelines Discussion List
> On Behalf Of Alain Benveniste
> Sent: Friday, 29 Janua
ry 2021 12:12
To: CMS-PIPELINES@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: [CMS-PIPELINES] Lookup with floor
Caution! External email. Do not open attachments or click links, unless
this email comes from a known sender and you know the content is safe.
Hi,
"PIPE (ENDchar ?)",
ge-
From: CMSTSO Pipelines Discussion List On Behalf
Of Alain Benveniste
Sent: Friday, 29 January 2021 12:12
To: CMS-PIPELINES@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: [CMS-PIPELINES] Lookup with floor
Caution! External email. Do not open attachments or click links, unless this
email comes from a known sen
Hi,
"PIPE (ENDchar ?)",
"literal a",
"!01: LOOKUP 1-* ???",
"! cons",
"?",
"literal b",
"!01:",
"?",
"01:",
"! cons"
Lookup with autoadd or ceiling, it works.
With FLOOR I get :
FPLSPR054E Range "LOOR" not valid
FPLSCA003I ... Issued from stage 2 of pipeline 1
14 matches
Mail list logo
