ProFox June 2017

profox@leafe.com

53 participants
64 discussions

Update To Running Multiple Instances of VFP 9
by Paul H. Tarver 16 Jun '17

16 Jun '17

Back in May, I asked a question about running multiple instances of VFP. I know now it was kind of a dumb question, but the response from everyone in the group inspired me to work up a small program to do exactly what I needed done when setting up a new project. Since you all were part of my solution I thought I'd share. Granted, this is slapped together and there are probably a thousand different ways to make this better, so be gentle! J The premise is to have a fast way to create a shortcut to a project as well as create a .FPW file at the same time. So I wrote this program, compiled it and added a short cut to my desktop so I can run it after a new project file is created in whatever project folder I want to use. It's designed to work on both 32 and 64 bit Windows and you can put anything you want between the Text..Endtext lines and it will be added to the .FPW file. The .FPW and .LNK files have the same name to keep it simple. Once a project is completed and I move it to my archive folders, I can re-run the program and choose the project file in the new storage folder and the shortcut and the .FPW are re-created to update the paths. I've been using this for a couple of weeks now and it works great for VFP9 and I THINK it will work with VFP6, but I haven't tried it yet. I chose to comment out the lines that reference the icon selection because the default was fine, but I left them in for future reference. The WScript.Shell code to actually create the shortcut I found in the Microsoft knowledgebase and I just updated the variable names. *!******************************************************************** LOCAL lcArguments, lcConfigFPW, lcFPWFile, lcProjectFile, lcProjectPath, lcShortCutPath LOCAL lcTargetPath, lcWorkingDir, loMyShortCut lcProjectFile = GETFILE('PJX', '', 'Select', 0, 'Select project file...') lcProjectPath = JUSTPATH(lcProjectFile) IF !EMPTY(lcProjectFile) TEXT TO lcConfigFPW TEXTMERGE NOSHOW SCREEN = OFF PATH = .\DATA; .\FORMS; .\GRAPHICS; .\LIBS; .\MENUS; .\PROGRAMS; .\REPORTS DEFAULT = "<<lcProjectPath>>" COMMAND = MODIFY PROJECT "<<lcProjectFile>>" TMPFILES=c:\temp EDITWORK=c:\temp SORTWORK=c:\temp PROGWORK=c:\temp ENDTEXT DO CASE CASE DIRECTORY("C:\Program Files (x86)", 1) = .T. && Is 64-Bit Operating System lcFPWFile = ADDBS(ALLTRIM(lcProjectPath)) + 'start-vfp9x64.fpw' lcShortCutPath = ADDBS(ALLTRIM(lcProjectPath)) + 'start-vfp9x64.lnk' lcTargetPath = "C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual FoxPro 9\vfp9.exe" * lcIconLocation = "C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual FoxPro 9\vfp9.exe" lcArguments = '-C' + '"' + lcFPWFile + '"' lcWorkingDir = "C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual FoxPro 9" CASE DIRECTORY("C:\Program Files (x86)", 1) = .F. && Is 32-Bit Operating System lcFPWFile = ADDBS(ALLTRIM(lcProjectPath)) + 'start-vfp9x32.fpw' lcShortCutPath = ADDBS(ALLTRIM(lcProjectPath)) + 'start-vfp9x32.lnk' lcTargetPath = "C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual FoxPro 9\vfp9.exe" * lcIconLocation = "C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual FoxPro 9\vfp9.exe" lcArguments = '-C' + '"' + lcFPWFile + '"' lcWorkingDir = "C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual FoxPro 9" ENDCASE STRTOFILE(lcConfigFPW, lcFPWFile) loWsh = CREATEOBJECT("WScript.Shell") loMyShortCut = loWsh.CreateShortcut(lcShortCutPath) loMyShortCut.WindowStyle = 7 && Minimized 0=Maximized 4=Normal * loMyShortcut.IconLocation = home() + "wizards\graphics\builder.ico" loMyShortCut.TargetPath = lcTargetPath loMyShortCut.Arguments = lcArguments loMyShortCut.WorkingDirectory = lcWorkingDir loMyShortCut.SAVE ENDIF RETURN *!******************************************************************** Paul H. Tarver Tarver Program Consultants, Inc./Quality PC of Meridian Email: <mailto:paul@tpcqpc.com> paul(a)tpcqpc.com --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html ---

2 1

RE: [NF] Do you prefer Digest Mode?
by Jerry Wolper 16 Jun '17

16 Jun '17

> That's strange! You sent the identical reply on Tues. - although it was from your other > email account. While this reply reached the List only Today! One advantage of Gmail is the ability to configure it to send from multiple addresses. That only works if you remember to change the "From" address, though. And, since, as Ed said, ProFox passes certain addresses straight through, resending the original post seemed like a good idea when I realized I hadn't made that change. Sorry about the duplicate. -Jerry --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html ---

1 0

[NF] Do you prefer Digest Mode?
by Paul H. Tarver 15 Jun '17

15 Jun '17

I'm, ummm, asking for a friend..:) Do you prefer gettings ProFoxTech emails individually or in digest mode? I've been using digest mode but I'm considering switching. Thoughts? Paul H. Tarver Tarver Program Consultants, Inc Email: <mailto:paul@tpcqpc.com> paul(a)tpcqpc.com --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html ---

9 20

Re: [NF] Do you prefer Digest Mode?
by JW 15 Jun '17

15 Jun '17

For a list like ProFox, where the ability to interact in real time, or at least its email equivalent, is really useful when trying to solve a problem, Digest Mode is probably not a good idea. There are lists where timeliness is less crucial, though, and seeing their contents once a day is fine. As Kurt pointed out, it's incumbent on the digest recipient to format responses properly. -Jerry --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html ---

4 3

Conditional formatting in reports
by Paul Newton 13 Jun '17

13 Jun '17

Hi all I have always used the approach to be found in Help\Samples and Walkthroughs\Samples\Solution Samples\reports Solution Samples\Use Conditional Formatting in a Report Sample However having sometimes three or more overlaid field controls with different Print When conditions can make report maintenance a PITA. So I have been looking at dynamically formatting report controls and in many ways this is a much neater approach and certainly makes report maintenance a lot easier. The only drawback (and it is potentially a show stopper) is that in our situation we cannot guarantee that the end user will be using ReportBehavior 90. So I was wondering what other people do: 1. Do you use conditional formatting with multiple controls or dynamic formatting with a single control? Or sometimes one and sometimes the other? 2. Do you force ReportBehavior 90 so that dynamic formatting will always work? BTW the reason that some users prefer to use 80 is because the report is rendered page-by-page and with large reports there is very little delay between calling the report and having the first page rendered. With 90 there can be a very considerable delay before the first page is rendered. I would be very interested in other people's thoughts. Paul Newton

3 2

Re: [NF] Do you prefer Digest Mode?
by Jerry Wolper 13 Jun '17

13 Jun '17

3 2

Re: [NF] Do you prefer Digest Mode?
by Gene Wirchenko 13 Jun '17

13 Jun '17

At 15:36 2017-06-12, Ted Roche <tedroche(a)gmail.com> wrote: >On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 4:51 PM, Paul H. Tarver <paul(a)tpcqpc.com> wrote: > > I'm, ummm, asking for a friend..:) > > Do you prefer gettings ProFoxTech emails individually or in digest mode? > > I've been using digest mode but I'm considering switching. > > Thoughts? >I think Digest Mode is an artifact of the past, when slow computers >and slower dial-up speeds made it slow to download, parse and store >separate messages. Also, modern email clients make it easier for you >to filter and organize mailing list messages into separate folders, >essentially creating a digest on your end. So, I don't see an upside >to Digest Mode. And replying to messages is a mess, as Kurt said. What Ted stated. Which includes what Kurt stated. Sincerely, Gene Wirchenko

3 2

"Record is not available" error in FPW 2.6
by Michael Madigan 11 Jun '17

11 Jun '17

For the first time in 24 years some users are getting the scrolling "Record is not available" in FPW 2.5. This error is extremely annoying because it can't be trapped by an error handler, and it has no error number. I can only rely on users to tell me it's happening, and have no way to time stamp it. The program is running on Terminal Services with Windows Server 2008 as the file server. There are 4 terminal services servers, 1 file server, and approximately 40 users. I have been told this happens on 2 unrelated programs each hosted on the same server, although this is not verified. This makes me think this may not be a software issue, hut instead a hardware issue. This started when 5 new employees started. 5 more simultaneous users, but these users are only using one of the programs. It only happens for a few minutes then clears itself. It happens maybe 2 times a day for 5-10 minutes and everyone has to wait. I've gone through google and the leafe archives and found some hints. I think this is a hardware issue, where some rogue task is taking down the file server's or terminal server's performance. The hardware guy seems to think it's a software issue, even though 2 separate, distinct programs are having issues and they don't have any interaction between them. 1. I recreated the indexes from scratch, not just reindex. 2. The line code that triggers this set century on replace gemdebto.dmmemo with gemdebto.dmmemo+chr(13)+chr(13)+chr(10)+"Notes:"+dtoc(date())+' '+time()+' '+"Computer:"+padr(memuser,15,' ')+' '+memnotes flush if rlock() replace debt.lastworked with date(), debt.nxt_con_dt with date()+7 flush endif I know I can do that in one line with one replace command, and one flush. Are Flushes necessary on a modern setup like this? Set autosave is on, should it be set off? Could that be causing too much network traffic? I can't believe that it would with only 40 people. Any ideas? --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html ---

7 17

Re: e: [NF] PyQT for desktop applications
by Gene Wirchenko 09 Jun '17

09 Jun '17

At 05:14 2017-06-07, Stephen Russell <srussell705(a)gmail.com> wrote: >On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 1:55 AM, Gene Wirchenko <genew(a)telus.net> wrote: > > > At 21:28 2017-06-06, mbsoftwaresolutions(a)mbsoftwaresolutions.com wrote: > > > > [snip] > > > > I was surprised years ago (and somewhat still am) with how low the bar got > >> set on what was an acceptable UX on a website. Much of that would have > >> NEVER been tolerated in a desktop app. > > <sarcasm style="dripping">But Web app UX has been improving > > oh-so-much-more than desktop apps for some time now.</sarcasm> >For some reason, you see UX like a painter who's medium is oil based. When >presented water colors you do not know how to express your craft with the >tools and call them inferior because of it. Nope, because I do not do much Web programming. I am an end user for the most part with Webpages. I see plenty of Webpages that have been (mis)designed by others that are a horror to use. I do not like the poor UX. >In the end, both mediums can be crafted and form great pieces of art. The >petty bickering between the artist gets redundant after a while. While Webpages can be great, etc., they all too often not only are not great but are horrid. Sincerely, Gene Wirchenko

6 9

[NF] free python book
by Stephen Russell 09 Jun '17

09 Jun '17

http://itknowledgecloud.tradepub.com/free/w_dive01/prgm.cgi -- Stephen Russell Sr. Analyst Ring Container Technology Oakland TN 901.246-0159 cell --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html ---

4 3

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

ProFox June 2017