Inline Edit Behavior: During inline edit of a cell, by default, the changes are saved if the user confirms the changes either by pressing enter or any arrow keys. During the edit, if the Get loses focus, either by clicking another cell or changing focus to another window/dialog, ...
... The pirnting, we are created PDF as normal web application do. Regards, Dutch Dear Dutch, Many thanks for your response. It helps me a lot and confirms that I am on the right track. One always doubts. We have also already converted parts of the program to the web. Do you already have the web ...
Dear Dutch, Many thanks for your response. It helps me a lot and confirms that I am on the right track. One always doubts. We have also already converted parts of the program to the web. Do you already have the web application in real use? Maybe you can ...
... .. but oRecA := oRs:oChild:Record(,.F.) and oRacB := oRs:oChild:oChild:Record(,.T.) was saved by oRecA:save() and oRecB:save(), the database confirms the update/appended but even with oRs:SyncChild() or oRs:oChild:SyncChild(), or oRs:oChild:ReSync() oRs:oChild:oChild:ReSync() .... or :ReQuery ...
Marcelo I use the same logic .. however I don't think Reinaldo wants to create a new record and generate the primary keys unless the user confirms all the information ... I understand where Reinaldo is coming from .. when you test for oBrw:bPastEof .. you have to create a new record .. and ...
I have a billing program that sends its output to print either to paper or print to .pdf. My user is always committing his invoices before he confirms the print job is completed or the send to .pdf is on his desktop.
Just need a way to test that the print job is complete.
... The code I provided is wrong: @ 1,1 SAY "TEST" GET cInput PICTURE cInput bust be @ 1,1 SAY "TEST" GET cInput PICTURE cPict It confirms it is not a FiveWin problem. I am searching assistance by the harbour developers. Regards. Antonino
... for static variables: in Harbour: 3C60 in xHarbour: AB9C That means that xHarbour uses much more static variables than Harbour. To me the above confirms my idea that Harbour is much more evolved than xHarbour and thus the difference in sizes. On a mid term, the software tends to grow as it grows ...
... to Viktor Szakáts and I have sent him Michel files, so he may be able to check it for himself and asked his help to report the bug in case he also confirms that looks like a bug. I have been able to reproduce Michel's bug using FiveDBU only, so to me it seems as a RDD bug that somehow is manifesting ...
... ER. I'm all for anything free -the sooner the better. My point is totally different than you seem to understand. AMOF, Lucas questions only confirms my point -although he doesn't seem to see it. The fact that FW can't work with FR 64 bits using MSVC 64, is only a testament that fw needs ...
... the user runs the program and menu option to setup the printers for use, actually the LOCAL CLOCK.INI should be loaded and read . After the user confirms, the LOCAL INI file shoul be saved on WS machine somewhere. This way whenever each WS user prints something the printout will go on the printer ...
Enrico, Not sure yet. I am helping a FWH and xHarbour user who reports that he does not get the line numbers. Once he confirms me that its ok, then I will report it here also :-) Last versions xHarbour print numbers of lines on the screen (if use buildx.bat). For comp.log it is possible ...