[Progress Communities] [Progress OpenEdge ABL] Forum Post: RE: Application Compiler returning error 855

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

ChUIMonster

Guest
You may not have the authority to unilaterally upgrade but you certainly have the opportunity to learn why that upgrade is important and to speak up in favor of it. If the company is deliberately choosing to stay on v9 one the following factors are likely in play: 1) They don't know any better - you can help them to know better. 2) They have not been keeping maintenance current and would have to pay for up to date licenses - if they are that cheap what does that say about your prospects at this company? v9 is not just ancient, obsolete and unsupported -- it is irresponsible to continue to operate a mission critical system on v9. v9 was designed in the late 90's - the landscape was very, very different back then. Is the company still running Windows 95 / 98 on all of its desktops? If you, personally, want to have a future writing Progress code you need to be learning about new features and capabilities. The current release, for instance, is OpenEdge 12. If you were learning the Microsoft stack would you be focused on Visual Basic 4? BTW -- FIND FIRST doesn't "call a column". It fetches a row into a buffer (all of the columns of that record). You can then reference the column in whatever code you write after that. Also - in most cases FIRST is inappropriate. I can understand it as a quick and dirty way to write test code (test2.p) but if you are under the impression that FIND must always have a FIRST that is wrong. If you have the misfortune of working with a code base where someone long ago decided to always put FIRST after ever FIND you should at the very least be aware that it is not necessary, not helpful and is, in fact, misleading and the source of difficult to resolve bugs. At best it is a bad example that should not be followed or adopted. The WHERE clause in a FIND should almost always identify a UNIQUE record. In which case FIRST does nothing except mislead the future maintenance programmer into thinking that there could potentially be a multi-record result set.

Continue reading...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top