GROUP definition ... again.

[Ross_ValuSoft]

Last year I raised this topic. See http://forums.fivetechsupport.com/viewt ... =4&t=18961

I still believe that the definition/documentation for the GROUP command is wrong ... or I am misunderstanding its text.

Code: Select all

// FiveWin for Pocket PC - Testing the GROUP command

#include "FWCE.ch"

//----------------------------------------------------------------------------//

Function Main()

    /*
      The present FWPPC documentation for the GROUP command says

      @ <nTop> . <nLeft> [ GROUP <oGroup> ] TO <nBottom>, <nRight>

      which should mean that all of the following group frames will "sit"
      on row 8. However, as seen in the following code, they all have
      the same height instead. Likewise for the "nRight" parameter which
      is seen to be a width definition.

      The command should be corrected to be :-

      @ <nTop> . <nLeft> [ GROUP <oGroup> ] TO <nHeight>, <nWidth>

    */

   local oWnd, oGrp1, oGrp2, oGrp3, oGrp4, oGrp5, oGrp6

   DEFINE WINDOW oWnd TITLE "Test GROUPs"

        @ 1,  1 GROUP oGrp1 TO 8, 5 PROMPT " 1 "
        @ 2,  6 GROUP oGrp2 TO 8, 5 PROMPT " 2 "
        @ 3, 11 GROUP oGrp3 TO 8, 5 PROMPT " 3 "
        @ 4, 16 GROUP oGrp4 TO 8, 5 PROMPT " 4 "
        @ 5, 21 GROUP oGrp5 TO 8, 5 PROMPT " 5 "
        @ 6, 26 GROUP oGrp6 TO 8, 5 PROMPT " 6 "


   ACTIVATE WINDOW oWnd ;
      ON CLICK MsgInfo( "Click!" )

return nil

//----------------------------------------------------------------------------//
 

Would appreciate someone else confirming what I say ... or showing me where I am wrong.

Thanks,

Ross

[Ross_ValuSoft]

So now ... let's see. My code and request has been viewed 44 times, but no one has tried my code and bothered to say if they get 6 little boxes of the same height which would prove that the group command definition is wrong. Interesting ...

[Enrico Maria Giordano]

Works as expected for me using FWH. Can you try with FWH and confirm that the FWPPC behavior is different?

EMG

[Antonio Linares]

Ross,

I missed your post, my apologizes.

We modified the GROUP command on FWH but not on FWPPC yet, thats why they are different actually.

[Ross_ValuSoft]

Enrico, I don't use FWH. I only use FWPPC, so I was simply trying to help other "FWPPC-only" developers to avoid the lost time that I experienced using the group command ... and I don't like incorrect documentation never being fixed.

Antonio, thanks for confirming that I have been correct since first raising this issue in June 2010; 18 months is a long time to get my report accepted.

Cheers,

Ross