Phil Brammer
Naomi Nosonovsky wrote: |
| I think my comments are important for this thread. We're talking about code efficiency.
| |
Naomi,
Code efficiency is part of the conversation. The other, as stated earlier, is to provide alternative options to the question at hand and to provide a learning environment. A more better long term solution might be Marcia's function (with or without your code efficiency change). The goal here is not necessarily to provide one line of obfuscated code that "works efficiently" to the original poster, but to post something that helps them *learn* what it is that you are trying to convey.
Even when a user wants a simple, concise answer, it is often beneficial for other users who might view this thread to see other alternatives. It is this point that you need to work on when responding to posts. Please keep in mind that your answers are going to be viewed by other, future users and while they may have the EXACT same problem, most will have a problem slightly similar in which case having alternatives posted may very well be the answer they need. I'm not suggesting you post alternatives; keep doing what you're doing as you have quite a bit of VFP knowledge to share. But don't ever critisize another user's post when it's technically correct. Just let the forums work as they are supposed to.