Sign up on the Revelation Software website to have access to the most current content, and to be able to ask questions and get answers from the Revelation community

At 12 APR 2000 01:34:43PM Dave Pociu wrote:

There is still more help that I need on this:

I followed Mike Ruane's hint and used the ARev IN.VALUE function instead of ICONV, as it seems to still work from within OI. It not only handles (D), (MDx) validations but also things like , %U%, SUBROUTINE, etc.

However, there are 2 catches:

1. Compound validations ( Ex: UPPER_CASE+) have to handled individually ( Ex: UPPER_CASE then separatelly) because otherwise the status() returned at the end is the status() of the LAST validation ONLY!

2. IN.VALUE does not handle multivalued data for validations of type for example. On the other hand, it seems to handle multivalued validations for things like (D) very well. Very inconsistent…

Obviously, there is still something missing here. Any ideas?

Thanks

Dave


At 18 MAY 2000 08:32AM Mike Ruane, WinWin Solutions Inc. wrote:

Dave-

After looking more closely at the IN.VALUE code I'm wondering if you are calling it correctly? Here is a sample code:

Subroutine InVal_test(Dummy)

declare function In.value

TEST=In.Value('12','(MD2)+PHONE_FORMAT', VALID)

DEBUG

In this case, the variable VALID is set to false- but TEST contains Iconv'd data.

Are you checking for VALID?

Hope it helps-

Mike Ruane

WinWin Solutions Inc.

WWW.WinWinSol.Com

View this thread on the forum...

  • third_party_content/community/commentary/forums_nonworks/6fef1a669de36e2c852568bf00609045.txt
  • Last modified: 2023/12/28 07:40
  • by 127.0.0.1