On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 12:45 PM, John Weller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But that won't position the record pointer - which is what I wanted. > Personally I prefer to use a SEEK instead of SET RELATION TO to position > the > record pointer for whatever I need. I accept your point that SQL is more > general but I can't see anyone ever wanting to move code to another > language, there are too many differences so it would be a re-write job > anyway. > ------------------------------------------------------ Dude that is so 1980s. It is close to the end of the 2000s and your coding like your back in time. You should really consider abstracting the data from your interface. Why do you need a pointer to a row of data and worse yet why set relation to another table? update myCrud set ThisCol = 'A new Value' where howWeFoundtheRow update MyRelatedCrud set thatOtherCol = 'This other value' where fkey in ( Select key from myCrud where howWeFoundtheRow ) -- Stephen Russell Sr. Production Systems Programmer Mimeo.com Memphis TN 901.246-0159 --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] 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/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** 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.
