1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 <2008> 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 | Index | 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 <2008> 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 |
<== Date ==> | <== Thread ==> |
---|
Subject: | Re: asynRecord immutable fields |
From: | Eric Williams <[email protected]> |
To: | Mark Rivers <[email protected]> |
Cc: | [email protected] |
Date: | Wed, 23 Jan 2008 12:42:57 -0800 |
Since I didn't say TIME changed with dbpf, I'm not surprised at your results.When I process the genSub record, which triggersThat is incorrect behavior, writing to the TMOD or NOWT fields should NOT cause the TIME field to update, because those fields are not defined as PP (Process Passive). When I test modifying those fields with dbpf the TIME field does NOT update:
the write to those fields, the TIME field of the asynRec is updated.
I suspect that perhaps you have the attribute PP on your gensub links for the TMOD and NOWT fields, while those should actually be NPP. But I still don't understand why the fields would not update.Yes, the links from the genSub record are PP. That may be unnecessary, but, as you say, it doesn't explain why the fields won't update. If there were a bug in my genSub processing routine, then when I re-link the output to a longin record instead of NOWT it should also fail. Yet it succeeds. Very puzzling.