8 Replies Latest reply on May 4, 2010 1:49 PM by comment_1

    Was there a change between FM9 and FM10...

    MstrPBK

      Title

      Was there a change between FM9 and FM10...

      Post

      At one time I could construct a calculation that would read:

       

      if(Feild A = "";"- -";"") ... meaning if Feild A had nothing in it then set the value of a secondary feild to - -, else leave the feild enpty.

       

      Was there a change somewhere that I did not see?

      Is this now distingueshed by the type of data??

      Within FM10 what is the current, correct way to determine if a feild is empty?

       

      Peter Kelley

      St. Paul, MN USA

       


        • 1. Re: Was there a change between FM9 and FM10...
          fitch

          That hasn't changed, you can do it that way. My preference though, would be:

          Case( IsEmpty( Field A ) ; " " )

          • 2. Re: Was there a change between FM9 and FM10...
            MstrPBK

            blink ... I had never thougut of trying Case ...(high school BASIC programming) ... CASE command was for multipul options of a outcome not a varifiaction tool.  Will try it to see if that works better ... right now the other way it is not responding at all.

             

            5 minutes later ....

             

            Weird side effect ... Upon adding the CASE statelemt the IF I had placed in script earlier became active and triggered correctly (thus causing

            "- -- -"). When I took the CASE out the IF reverted back to not working again.  The CASE does work on its own, and thus in the in the future that will have to be my standard proceedure.

            • 3. Re: Was there a change between FM9 and FM10...
              fitch

              Both Case and If should work equally well. My main point was actually the use of the IsEmpty( ) function.

               

              The essential difference between If and Case is that Case can evaluate multiple tests, e.g.:

              Case( test A; result A ; test B ; result B )

               

              For that reason I tend to just use Case all the time. (Also, you used to have to specify a default result when using If, but that's no longer true.)

               

              Perhaps what's really going on is this (from FileMaker help):

              "By default, if test refers to a field that doesn’t yet contain a value, If returns an empty result. To override this functionality, deselect the Do not evaluate if all referenced fields are empty checkbox."

              • 4. Re: Was there a change between FM9 and FM10...
                MstrPBK

                First thank you for your patience in walking this through with me.  It has made me a little more sane.

                 

                Ummm ...

                 

                In the past ... I have been able to use the double quote "" to stand for 'no data'.  The other 64 IFs in the current calcultation work just fine if the feild is referancing a number of a secondary feild (which is normal behavour fo any calculation).

                 

                [thinks to myself] Wonder if I can contruct a 'calcilation script" to do a Roman Numral generator in less than 64 lines - mind you using the archaic roman numeral system ...

                 

                Peter Kelley

                St Paul, MN USA

                • 5. Re: Was there a change between FM9 and FM10...
                  mrvodka

                  64 Ifs? Surely this calc can be optimized. Perhaps you can post it.

                  • 6. Re: Was there a change between FM9 and FM10...
                    comment_1

                     


                    MstrPBK wrote:

                    In the past ... I have been able to use the double quote "" to stand for 'no data'. 


                    You still can. As Tom stated, there is no functional difference between all the formulae mentioned - and they all require the option "Do not evaluate if all referenced fields are empty." to be deselected.

                     

                     

                     


                    MstrPBK wrote:

                    Wonder if I can contruct a 'calcilation script" to do a Roman Numral generator in less than 64 lines


                    I'd think about one line per digit (decimal) would be required - but I am not exactly sure what the "archaic" roman numeral system is. Is there a "modern" one?

                     



                    • 7. Re: Was there a change between FM9 and FM10...
                      MstrPBK

                      REFERANCE TO ROMAN NUMERALS

                      Yes there are Modern and Archaic Romen Numeral systems.  The main differences between them are:

                       

                      • the use of "IIII" for 4 rather than IV
                      • ... in turn this forces a strict left to right conversion
                      • In the archaic numbering system only goes up to 4,999; while contemporary sustems try to suggest that there was/are indicators for values above this without value specifics.

                      In my hypothesis of the numeric system the over-underscore actually does have a critical meaning which I will be asking other professionals about. 

                      • 8. Re: Was there a change between FM9 and FM10...
                        comment_1

                         


                        MstrPBK wrote:
                        • the use of "IIII" for 4 rather than IV

                         

                        If that's the extent of it, then you only need to exchange one symbol for another. I don't see why this would force a change in the conversion direction (which I would do from left to right anyway, simply because it's convenient that way).

                         

                         

                        The roman numerals that I know go up to 4,000 (if you recognize MMMM as valid notation, 3,999 otherwise), unless additional notation such as a bar, a frame or parentheses is used.