Rec. dilemma

anil_mujagic

Hi everyone!

I have Master and Detail tables...

Master:
Year
Month

Detail:
Year
Month
OtherDetailFields (not relevant for this problem)
.
.
.

I defined recDetail Record variable in Master table which points to Detail table and I want to delete detail records in OnDelete trigger of Master table. Which of following solutions should I use:

recDetail.SETRANGE(Year, Year);
recDetail.SETRANGE(Month, Month);
recDetail.DELETEALL;

or this:

recDetail.SETRANGE(Year, Rec.Year);
recDetail.SETRANGE(Month, Rec.Month);
recDetail.DELETEALL;

or this:

recDetail.SETRANGE(recDetail.Year, Rec.Year);
recDetail.SETRANGE(recDetail.Month, Rec.Month);
recDetail.DELETEALL;

All of them work but which is considered a "Best practice"?

Thanks!

DenSter

They would all work the same (assuming that you're programming this inside the master rec), and I like the second one most for readability. This first parameter is the field of the record variable that you're filtering on, so it's not necessary to specify the rec again.

I always select the field in the object browser's field list, and then I manually type SETFILTER( or SETRANGE(.

anil_mujagic

DenSter wrote:

I always select the field in the object browser's field list, and then I manually type SETFILTER( or SETRANGE(.

You mean "recDetail.Year.SETRANGE("

Wouldn't that require defining additional FieldRef variable?

DenSter

No even I can't get away with incorrect syntax.....

I look up the field in the object browser and select the one I need:

MyRec.MyField

Then I put the cursor right after the dot (CTRL+Arrow left) and type:

MyRec.SETFILTER(MyField

Then I move the cursor to the end (end key) and type the filter criterium:

MyRec.SETFILTER(MyField,'<>%1',SomeOtherRec.SomeField);

That's how I do it. You don't need the MyRec reference, since that is already set with the SETFILTER. I do like to explicitly put the other rec variable reference in there, it is just more readable for me.

DenSter

By The way, I never use WITH, I absolutely hate that command, it drives me nuts. ](*,)

anil_mujagic

DenSter wrote:

By The way, I never use WITH, I absolutely hate that command, it drives me nuts. ](*,)

I agree WITH you

Thanks for explanations!