Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Helpful Harry <HelpfulHarry@BusyWorking.com>
Newsgroups: comp.databases.filemaker
Subject: Re: Value Not Dependent on the Found Set
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 18:57:38 +1300
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <141120131857384243%HelpfulHarry@BusyWorking.com>
References: <1lc5yrc.rmt30810crvj2N%csampson@inetworld.net> <0fa27c27-d6b7-477b-9104-15fb90b2c124@googlegroups.com> <1lc9olh.fh6kuzk00mfN%csampson@inetworld.net> <4f6960ba-9ead-4d3d-9955-6f3fc3a10f43@googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: YmJ22tds4W+LgDc1aUzXUg.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
User-Agent: Thoth/1.5.4 (Carbon/OS X)
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Xref: csiph.com comp.databases.filemaker:1505

In article <4f6960ba-9ead-4d3d-9955-6f3fc3a10f43@googlegroups.com>,
Howard - FM Pro Solutions <fmprosolutions@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 13, 2013 9:47:36 AM UTC-8, Charles H. Sampson wrote:
> > Howard - FM Pro Solutions <fmprosolutions@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > If you have an UNSTORED (calc field) value, then it will automatically
> > > update itself whenever one of its dependencies are changed.  If you want a
> > > STORED dependent field to change, then you'll need to somehow
> > > force-trigger that change through a script or sometimes through use of the
> > > Evaluate() function with dependencies specified.
> > 
> >      The true believers in FileMaker seem to accept this the way of the
> > world. Here's what I, as a long-time designer and implementer of systems
> > software, see. With FileMaker we have a piece of software that permits
> > users to say, "Here is a formula. I want the value of that formula to be
> > put in this location." The implementers of FileMaker then say, "Fine.
> > We'll do that for you sometimes and sometimes we'll put a value that has
> > nothing to do with your formula." The only word that describes such an
> > "implementation" is "absurd".
> 
> Those of us who understand how FIleMaker works are fine with doing it the
> "FileMaker way".  I'm not sure that's absurd; it's just reality.
> 
> But let's look at other databases. 
<snip>

I tried to use Access yesterday to make a very simple database that
needed to calculate the sum of data in related records (something that
would take less than five minutes in FileMaker to whip up) ... good
grief what an disgutingly hopeless pig of a system that is. In the end
I gave up wasting the time and went back to the old slower method in
Excel instead.

Helpful Harry  :o)