Vtg 5 PO form problem

Yahoo Archive
1
Wayne,

I've never found the "whileprintingrecords" to make a significant difference. Seagate suggest using it wherever possilbe to limit confusion of when things should be evaluated.

Troy Funte
Liberty Electronics

----- Original Message -----
From: Wayne Cox
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2001 1:11 PM
Subject: [Vantage] Vtg 5 PO form problem


At 07:03 PM 12/5/2001, you wrote:
>We had been using this form for about a month and just discovered that adding
>this sort causes the @Total field to not include the Misc. Charges. Since the
>calculation is lengthy and I didn't have time to debug, I've changed it
>back to
>the old, confusing way but at least we now have everything included in the

Cool! The sort is to blame! Thanks, Mike and Olwyn.

I had added a sort on porel.DueDate in V4 to correct the out of sequence
releases everyone gripes about. For some reason, removing the sort made
the total correct again.

A couple of the calculated fields the total uses have a
WhilePrintingRecords in them. From what the help file says, this is
supposed to cause the field to be evaluated for every record, even if the
calculated field does not print on the report? Maybe since the sort
requires an extra pass through the data before printing, it throws off the
logic? I don't know enough about Crystal to say if it's a bug or a
feature. If Troy or any other Crystal experts know, I'd be curious to hear.

As for the releases... they're now printing in correct date order even
without the sort (this is 5.00.332) Maybe they fixed Vantage so it sorts
them prior to exporting?

-Wayne


Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT




Useful links for the Yahoo!Groups Vantage Board are: ( Note: You must have already linked your email address to a yahoo id to enable access. )
(1) To access the Files Section of our Yahoo!Group for Report Builder and Crystal Reports and other 'goodies', please goto: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/files/.
(2) To search through old msg's goto: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/messages
(3) To view links to Vendors that provide Vantage services goto: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/vantage/links

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2
Hi All,

Have a confusing problem with our PO form since updating to Vantage 5.0. I
reused our heavily modified 4.0 Crystal form, rather than re-applying all
the changes to the stock 5.0 form. It appeared to work. Recently, we
discovered the total line on the PO does not add in miscellaneous charge items.

I've been through all the calculated fields that appear to play into the
total calculation: @Total, @POTotal, @HeadMiscTotal and @ExtCost. None of
them have any changes between the 4.0 and 5.0 forms. Any ideas why it
would fail to total up the misc charges?

Almost forgot Oddity #2: my modified PO form prints the detail lines (with
the release and misc charge data) out of sequence. In the preview and on
paper it prints: Detail-B Detail-C Detail-A I don't even know of any
options in Crystal that would force it to do that?! Is that a really some
"feature" I don't know about?

I should probably just start over on the dang 5.0 form.

-Thanks,
Wayne Cox
3
Wayne

#1 Our release 4 standard PO form (UK) has always had these problems with
the miscellaneous charges not being added into the total - most people seem
to use modified forms so are possibly not aware that the standard is
incorrect. We only use the standard form sets so have had to have a version
modified by Ryan in support to correct this - he could maybe help you with a
fix for this one.

#2 We are also still waiting for a fix to the releases being out of
sequence - apparently when support checked they are not sorted at all
(neither release sequence or date sequence) so can appear in entirely random
order when printing. Our suppliers have found it confusing and have
complained that they may miss required dates. Support have tried several
solutions - sorting the releases by date would seem to give a fix but when
they tried this we lost the printed data relating to job numbers for sub
contract purchases to a job so had to revert back to the incorrect version
as the lesser of 2 evils!!

If anyone has a "standard" UK form with all these aspects fixed we would be
grateful to have a copy - it has been going on for a while now. Also would
be interested to know if these issues have been fixed in 5.0 or 5.1.

Many thanks

Olwyn Emery

Hallam Plastics
olwyn@...