As I gain proficiency in FM, I'd like to replace all the instances of five or six virtually identical scripts that do the same basic thing with one more general script. But I am finding that this is not often so easy, as much as I am learning about objects and design functions. For example, there seems to be no simple way of replicating Go To Related Record when you aren't dealing with concrete, specific TOs. The tools sometimes don't appear to offer what is necessary, and I have had to consider introducing inelegant calculation fields to try to mimic the action of commands that work well with specific objects.

I'd very much like to know what seasoned FM scripters do. Is the aim of writing general scripts that eliminate redundancy one of those ideas that is nice in theory but not worth the effort in practice?

GTRR is a marvelously handy tool. But I think there is some movement towards scripted finds. This is particularly the case where GTRR doesn't work in the separation model. If the target file is not the data file, then GTRR doesn't work and you need to perform a find operation.

Thanks. That's a tremendous help.

It seems, then, that when one works this way, one bypasses relationships altogether, in effect reproducing them through finds. I'm used to working with portals, not finds, so this will takes some getting used to, but it appears that you have put me onto a powerful way of getting things done, which I'll continue to explore.

Jerry

Thanks. That's a tremendous help.

It seems, then, that when one works this way, one bypasses relationships altogether, in effect reproducing them through finds. I'm used to working with portals, not finds, so this will takes some getting used to, but it appears that you have put me onto a powerful way of getting things done, which I'll continue to explore.

Jerry

Not at all. The purpose of GTRR is to go to the item records. There is no contradiction to using portals.

I'm getting the hang of using finds to navigate between portals thanks to your excellent advice. But I'm running into one significant problem. Many of my layouts don't include the serial ID that uniquely identify the records. I don't want my users to see that ID, but I need it for my finds.

What to do? Hide a field in the layout? Is there a better way of going about this?

Thanks in advance if you have any insight. (Note that I posted this issue as a new post in case someone else has something to offer, too.)