Set Field --> Replace Contents

[QuinTech]

Because of a brain fart, I have two scripts with a total of about 75 "Set Field" steps with complex calculations that should have been "Replace Contents" steps.

Would be nice to just double-click each one and turn it from Set Field to Replace Contents.

As it is, I have to create a new step for Replace Contents, specify the correct field, then copy the calc from the Set Field step, go back to Replace Contents, click Specify, click Calculation, paste, click OK, click OK. Monkey work, I know, but there are bound to be errors.

[Raybaudi]

Hi, QuinTech

I suggest you to try the TopTip in the tip forum.

[QuinTech]

Hi, Daniele. I do not see the relevance of Top Tip to my issue.

I would love to offer comment on your example, but I have not even begun using version 7 and so I do not have anything intelligent to say.

Babelfish: Ciao, Daniele. Non vedo l'attinenza della punta superiore con mia edizione.

Amerei offrire il commento sul vostro esempio, ma neppure non ho cominciato a usando la versione 7 ed in modo da non ho nulla intelligente dire.

Jerry

[comment]

I believe you left out something:

Bruci quel fantasma alla terra, il mister Teacher del disco!

[LaRetta]

commento, avete raggiunto i messaggi massimi qui e non potete ricevere pi

[Raybaudi]

Here there is a .fp5 version of TopTip

TopTip_FM6.zip

[QuinTech]

LOL!

I am tempted to change my sig just so people browsing this thread will wonder what in the hell you're talking about, comment!

[LaRetta]

Well Jerry, I translated it and STIll have no idea what comment is talking about.

It kinda reminds me of when he presents a calculation solution. Many times I scratch my head for hours experiencing that very same blank-stare confusion.

[QuinTech]

It's a translation of my signature. ("Burn that disco ghost to the ground, Mister Teacher!") But the re-translation from Italian back to English is even funnier! I don't know where they get "caterpillars" (trattori a cingoli) from.

[LaRetta]

Yep! It came out as Caterpillars for me too - that's what was cracking me up. I figured one would need to understand where your sig came from, ie, who in the world was Mister Teacher and are you talking about disco like in John Travolta?

I figured your signature must have been a hit TV show or movie. And since I live and work FileMaker, I haven't seen a movie, TV or newspapers in YEARS!! I didn't want to ask (on the thread) and was going to PM him. I figured everyone would gasp in horror that I didn't know what it meant. I get that same response because I don't know our current president. Is it still Carter?

Oh. And thanks for showing me Babelfish. Very cool! I realized I had to change my wording around in the translation so it came out making sense. Otherwise it was a bit strange. But at least I didn't get insects when I tried translating mine back and forth.

[Raybaudi]

Hi to all friends

yes, this (some Babelfish translation) is very frustating... so now you know how it is difficult to understand !

Caterpillars or whatever... I don't understand nothing of Comment comment, neither the signature of QuinTech ;-) (but we have "smiles"!!)

[QuinTech]

It comes from an American TV show that was on HBO a few years ago, named "Mr. Show". It is basically nonsense, but it's funny in context.

I use it as my signature just because it makes me laugh every time I see it. You'd have to see the show on DVD to get it. I think it was from season 2.

[comment]

I am tempted to change my sig just so people browsing this thread will wonder what in the hell you're talking about

I was going to say that they will do that anyway, but LaRetta beat me to it...

Computer translations are a big joke. To translate, you need to understand the concepts behind the words. I got this nice example from an expert in artificial intelligence:

"The man hurled the [object] against the wall, smashing it to pieces."

Notice how the meaning changes when object is (a) bottle; (: sledgehammer.

[Ano Nimus]

"The man hurled the [object] against the wall, smashing it to pieces."

To be pedantic: grammatically speaking, it's the wall that's history, getting smashed by either a bottle or a sledgehammer.

We 'human intelligences' are smart enough to realize a bottle can't smash a wall, so we interpret the phrase correctly.

Unless it was a massive steel bottle!

For the bottle to break, we need to assume it is breakable, which most people will do.

But we all know what 'assume' does, don't we?