Jump to content

Make a record invisible?

This topic is 7870 days old. Please don't post here. Open a new topic instead.

Recommended Posts

Well, I am working with summaries in one file, the data for which is looked up from another file. Now, I may have put it together incorrectly (the topic of which is a whole other post I'm sure though), but basically if the summary fields cannot find the related record in the current found set in order to get the data, it simply uses the data from the last record instead of zero. Not sure if that will make sense, but what I did as a work around was create a record which will always be included in any found set and when sorted will be dead last. I have made the calculation for this record zero so that the summary in the other file will also be zero. Does that make sense? It's a strange work around, but it does work.

I would like to have this record be invisible to the user so they don't even have to know it is there and so it cannot be modified. And, I can't formally omit it because it needs to be in the found set.

crude and probably gratuitously complicated, no? smile.gif


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Summary data drawn from records in a related file is normally achieved using unstored calculations with aggregate functions (Sum( ), Max( ), Count( ) etc) rather than summary fields. Even if you want it to respond to finds performed in your main file, I'm not quite clear on why you'd need the mysterious extra record to be present.

Notwithstanding that, you could make the record appear blank (though it will still use up the same amount of screen area as all the other records) by placing a calculating container field (with its line and fill attributes set to transparent, and with the 'Allow Entry into field' option turned off) over the top, and setting its formula to something like:

Case(Status(CurrentRecordID) = 103, gRecordMask)

where gRecordMask is a global container field into which you've pasted a rectangle the same color as your layout background, and where the record ID of the record you want to mask is 103.

Before you go to these lengths, however, I'd encourage you to review your file structure and consider alternative way to generate the summary data you want, that may allow you to dispense with the phantom record altogether.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is 7870 days old. Please don't post here. Open a new topic instead.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.