× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.



All good reasons for using a FOR loop instead of a DO loop, imho. Lots of typical *duh* errors just disappear with the FOR loop.



Cassidy, Alan wrote:
=> Sounds like it's in a loop cycle trying to do a CHAIN using the subfile 
record number, but it's not incremented (staying at zero), or there's no test to 
leave the loop on a number that's not returned.

For reading subfiles by record number:
(X) You have to clear the field that you're using to loop and read the subfile.
(X) Initialize a value to start from in that field, (X) Increment the record number field you use to CHAIN with each loop, (X) And test for LEAVE-ing the loop, whether it's a not-found condition (NRF) on the CHAIN, or a maximum that we have from when we filled the subfile.

Anyway, those are things to look for when you get an error like that.

--Alan


As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.