Re: 4gl return value problem

"June C. Hunt" <june_c_hunt@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<2sd8c.52394$Fh4.329@twister.nyroc.rr.com>... > daisy wrote: > > I had a question occurred when my 4gl main program calling a > > function. There seems to be something wrong with the return value > > > > Statements in my main program : > > > > ud_fun() > > ........... > > let p=1 > > while p > > if del_fun() then exit while end if > > let p=0 > > end while > > if p then > > rollback work > > prompt "error... " for char answer > > end if > > ............ > > end function > > > > > > del_fun() > > ........ > > if m_ac31('2',n.acm02,n.acm00,n.acm01, > > o[i].acn02 thru o[i].acn15) then > > display "m_ac31 error ",o[i].acn02 at 21,1 > > sleep 5 > > return 1 > > end if > > .................. > > end function > > > > statements in my function > > > > m_ac31() > > ............... > > if status or sqlca.sqlerrd[3]<1 then > > display "Upd ac31 err-",status > > sleep 5 > > return 1 > > end if > > ...... > > > > > > My problem is that I 'sometimes ' found that the m_ac31 > > function was performed successfully (because there is no error message > > displayed ) > > but the results comed out wrong ; which means there were error > > during the function was called but my main program did not catch the > > return value .Could any one tell me where the problem is ? > > > > My Informix was old SE. I do not know what is the problem in my > > program. > > Since you don't specify what you mean when you say the results are wrong, > I'm just guessing at where to start. Was data changed that shouldn't have > been? Was data skipped? Were one or more unexpected records changed? Were > one or more expected records missed while others were selected? Simply > saying the results are "wrong" leaves a whole lot of possibilities. > > Without knowing exactly what "wrong" means, my first suggestion would be to > change the error checking in m_ac31. I would check SQLCA.SQLCODE rather > than STATUS - or check both. The STATUS variable will indicate errors from > both the form and from SQL statements whereas SQLCA.SQLCODE indicates errors > (or success) of just the SQL statements. Since you only show the error > checking, we can't be sure what comes before it in your code; I'd be more > comfortable checking the SQLCA record. I would also be inclined to evaluate > SQLCA.SQLERRD[3] against a known value. For example, I would find out how > many records I expect to process, and would compare SQLCA.SQLERRD[3] against > that value rather than zero. Is it possible that the problem isn't that no > records were processed but rather more records than you were expecting were > processed? With these changes, at least you'd be sure you were checking the > results of the last SQL statement and that you were processing as many > records as you were expecting. Note that this doesn't necessarily mean the > correct records were processed, but at least the actual number of records > can be determined. Sorry that I did not describe my question clearly. The statemenst in m_ac31 were as follows update ac31 set acp05=acp05-damt, acp06=acp06-camt, acp07=acp07-amt, acp08=acp08-amt, acp09=acp09-ramt where acp00=x.acn00 and acp01=x.acn04 andacp02=ym and acp03=dno and acp04=x.acn05 if status or sqlca.sqlerrd[3]<1 then let damt=damt*-1 let camt=camt*-1 let amt=amt*-1 let ramt=ramt*-1 insert into ac31 values (x.acn00,x.acn04,ym,dno,x.acn05,damt,camt, amt,amt,ramt) if status or sqlca.sqlerrd[3]<1 then display "Upd ac31 err-",status sleep 5 return 1 end if end if What bothered me was that sometimes I found that the record to be updated were actually exist, but after the program were completed and check the result I found that the record were not updated at all and the return value did not pass to the calling procedure (in my situation that's function del_fun()). Once I manually cleard the wrong result and I run the program again, but it comed out right . I don't know if it's problem of file lock , or is there any mistakes in my program. Please give me some advice . Thanks again