On 13.09.2013 16:47, Ralph Lange wrote:
On 13.09.2013 01:56, Zelazny, Michael Stanley wrote:
If the db library hard codes the time field, it is reasonable for
autosave to similarly hard code the time field?
Not really.
Well, maybe.
Pointing TSEL to other fields (like .VAL) is valid. The obtained value
is interpreted as an event number, and the timestamp of the last
occurence of that event is being used. (Requires an event system driver.)
The only way autoSaveRestore could find out if that link to .VAL was
put there intentionally or if it was converted from a link to .TIME
would be looking at the internal flag of the pv_link.
(ppv_link->pvlMask & pvlOptTSELisTime)
I don't know ... that looks a lot like working around a dirty hack
with another dirty hack.
Maybe using a new magic number for TSE would be a cleaner solution:
"-3" = use timestamp of record that TSEL points to.
That would make things a lot more obvious and autoSaveRestore would
just work.
Dear fellow core-talkers,
Would that work? Or am I missing something?
~Ralph
- Replies:
- Re: TSEL question Andrew Johnson
- References:
- Re: TSEL question Ralph Lange
- Navigate by Date:
- Prev:
Re: TSEL question Ralph Lange
- Next:
Re: TSEL question Andrew Johnson
- Index:
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
<2013>
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
- Navigate by Thread:
- Prev:
Re: TSEL question Ralph Lange
- Next:
Re: TSEL question Andrew Johnson
- Index:
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
<2013>
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
|