Problems with validation messages on VARPG projects

FROM:   FLAGLER  KEENE     Flagler, Rick: Manager, IT                           
   

DATE:   MARCH 10, 2000
SUBJECT:        Problems with validation messages on VARPG projects             
           


Alan, 

your explanation was very good. I can see now how the looping was 
triggered. In fact, the original code did NOT have any "visual effects" 
performed by the programmer and was supposed to rely on VARPG engine to 
do it. But because of the LOSTFOCUS event, I think that created the 
problem which I sought to fix by coding it myself and disconnecting the 
validation. I put both in to show "listeners" here what the alternatives 
were. Thank you for responding. I agree that VARPG could be improved by 
additional BIFs or attributes related to validation. If you could code:

D Passed_my_window_Checks      C    1
D Failed_my_window_Checks      C    0

C       IF %getatr(%window:%part:'validation')=Passed_my_window_Checks 
                --- ok code --
        ELSE
                --- error visual stuff code ---
        END

That would be a help for developers. Can you get that into M3? <grin>

Also, if you REFERENCE a field to a file on the AS/400, is there a way to 
get the library of the referenced field on the VARPG field properties to 
say *LIBL? If you reference and test in one library and then move the DB 
file to another library (putting into production), how are you supposed 
to re-reference the fields to the right file? Does it matter? VARPG never 
goes back to the referening file again during execution, right? It seems 
not to during compiles either. Seems inappropriate to change ODF to Ascii 
and find/replace it there from one library to another, but that works 
unless you hose you ODF file. If you change the library list of the 
AS/400 job and recompile, it's not supposed to change the reference stuff 
either, right? For now, we have assumed that as long as the referenced DB 
and the production DB are the same, it doesn't matter what the ref field 
is pointing at, but if I was writing for the green screen, that would be 
a no-no. If you've got an opinion about that one, I'd love to hear it. 
Thanks. RF