Have encountered exactly this issue.
You can convert the raw xml to xlsx (using DocumentFormat.OpenXml.Spreadsheet)
and Excel will happily open this. Sadly, have found that iPhone still can't.
Not sure why yet but it may be an Apple thing:
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/2494221?start=0
I have never personally used JET-EDIT. For a replacement, we wrote our
own code. Since we're an end-user site its not something released
anywhere.
- Josh
On 2/7/12 3:57 PM, "Wjhonson" wrote:
So what are they using in place of JET?
Did you ever use JET-EDIT to edit your programs?
-
I don't think using an INCLUDE is bad, but it must be done in the right way.
Pros:
* It is the fastest way to use reusable code.
* It can be debugged just fine if you use the correct compile arguments.
Cons:
* You must, MUST, address the variable names. I always prefix mine with
CODE$NAME where
David,
Could you elaborate a little more on your two positive arguments? Thanks for
your insights, and all those shared from others so far.
Thank you.
-Baker
-Original Message-
From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org
[mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of David
I would agree that code in includes provides a faster program than making an
external subroutine. I had performed tests when milliseconds counted, but now
systems are so fast the advantage is not noticeable.
Putting code in includes:
Makes debugging harder
Installing updates re
When you INCLUDE code during compile time it becomes as one, thus all your
subroutines are now internal subroutines. And internal subroutines execute
about 1000 times (just guessing here it's been a while since I have done
timing) faster than calling a subroutine.
For debugging, we just had some
Baker,
In production at my current site I have used Include only once, but for reasons
very different from what has already been discussed. I have a Shipment print
program customized into a true monster. It had not been rolled forward during
previous vendor (Dataflo) upgrades because of the d
1000? I find that hard to swallow on modern systems. To see that kind of
difference I suspect it would have to be really memory starved so as to not
cache it after the 1st use for commonly used routine. And if we're talking
about a routine that's once in a while, then the benefit doesn't add u
I have no idea what you're saying now.
I respond to you too much and I'm a troll.
You respond to me too much and you're justified.
One "Troll" to another
"Don't taze me man!"
-Original Message-
From: Tony Gravagno <3xk547...@sneakemail.com>
To: u2-users
Sent: Tue, Feb 7, 2012 11:37 p
What compile arguments?
I just checked the help pages for both BASIC and RAID and don't see anything
about including the INCLUDE code so the debugger can use it.
-Original Message-
From: David A. Green
To: 'U2 Users List'
Sent: Wed, Feb 8, 2012 6:21 am
Subject: Re: [U2] Including Cod
Required for UniData not UniVerse.
Brian
Sent from my iPad
On 8 Feb 2012, at 17:27, Wjhonson wrote:
>
> What compile arguments?
> I just checked the help pages for both BASIC and RAID and don't see anything
> about including the INCLUDE code so the debugger can use it.
>
>
>
> -Origin
ding ding ding... gentlemen, to your corners...
___
U2-Users mailing list
U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
Like with most things I'd say it depends.
I have worked with quite a few systems that use standard includes and
haven't noticed that those were harder to maintain than those that don't.
The reason being that those includes never get changed.
Usually these include equates (TRUE, FALSE, VM, AM etc
I believe he means, as can often happen, that your file structure changes.
You start with an invoice file of say 30 fields, and write 80 programs to
reference that include.
But down the road someone says oh hey we need to handle cases where we need to
add a "extension with no penalty" date, or a
Piping in with contrary notions all the way across the board! See my
remarks at -->[SJ] in four places, if you like.
On 07/02/12 23:46, Kevin King wrote:
> An include is fine for declarations, but not for executable code due to
the > fact that individual lines in the include cannot be debugged (
I'm curious; was the university in Florida Barry University?
Someone I worked with years ago went there as a Pick programmer.
The following code might be helpful
subroutine ucsv(result,source,status,is.oconv)
*
* Public Domain program for OpenQM by Keith Johnson 2012
*
* OCONV Converts f
No, it was Stetson University in Deland.
On 02-08-2012 4:47 PM, Keith Johnson [DATACOM] wrote:
I'm curious; was the university in Florida Barry University?
Someone I worked with years ago went there as a Pick programmer.
The following code might be helpful
subroutine ucsv(result,sourc
[AD]
Completely free
http://www.southeast-florida.com/ud/UD2EXCEL_CREATE_V2.zip
Contains:
- Perl Script to create XLS binary (97-2003)
- Unidata Programs including a demo program
- Limited Documentation
Some features
- Headers
- Columns Headings
- Sorting
- SubTotaling and Outlining
- Justificat
18 matches
Mail list logo
