 | |
#1
 
| |||
| |||
|
Finding Empty Field -
07-30-2003
, 08:18 PM
#2
| |||
| |||
|
|
When I use the * in a field in a find request to find or omit records that have no data in the field, I get the following error message: This field is defined to contain numeric values only. Allow this non-numeric entry? If I answer "Yes" and click "Find", I get the message: There are no valid criteria in this request. Type a valid request before clicking Find. My only choices then are Modify Find or Cancel. How then do I find or omit records with the criterion of an empty numeric field? I'm using FileMaker 6.0v4. |
supposed to be used for numbers.
A better way to find empty fields is to use the '=' symbol instead. The
'=' symbol matches exactly what is typed after it, so typing an '=' by
itself will match "nothing" (ie. an empty field).
Helpful Harry
"Just trying to help whenever I can."
)
#3
| |||
| |||
|
|
In article <t7_Va.27738$o54.23689@lakeread05>, Cecil Bankston cbankston (AT) spamfreecox (DOT) net> wrote: When I use the * in a field in a find request to find or omit records that have no data in the field, I get the following error message: This field is defined to contain numeric values only. Allow this non-numeric entry? If I answer "Yes" and click "Find", I get the message: There are no valid criteria in this request. Type a valid request before clicking Find. My only choices then are Modify Find or Cancel. How then do I find or omit records with the criterion of an empty numeric field? I'm using FileMaker 6.0v4. '*' will match fields containing zero or more characters, so isn't supposed to be used for numbers. A better way to find empty fields is to use the '=' symbol instead. The '=' symbol matches exactly what is typed after it, so typing an '=' by itself will match "nothing" (ie. an empty field). |
Omit function. When I tried entering = in the numeric field and
selecting Omit, I still got some records with no data in the field.
My specific application is a database that has 2 fields: MinimumSize &
MaximumSize. I wanted to find all records in which both MinimumSize &
MaximumSize were <2.2 but omit records that had no entry in MinimumSize.
I used a find request with <2.2 entered in both fields and added
another request with = in MinimumSize and Omit checked. Running this
Find includes all records with sizes <2.2 but also includes some records
with no data in either field.
As a workaround, I used a range .001...2.2 in MinimumSize and <2.2 in
MaximumSize. That works, but it would seem the = and Omit approach also
should work to eliminate those dataless records.
--
Cecil N. Bankston
Baton Rouge, LA USA
#4
| |||
| |||
|
|
In article <mXeWa.48$5f.34@lakeread05>, Cecil Bankston cbankston (AT) spamfreecox (DOT) net> wrote: Thanks Harry, Helpful Harry wrote: '*' will match fields containing zero or more characters, so isn't supposed to be used for numbers. A better way to find empty fields is to use the '=' symbol instead. The '=' symbol matches exactly what is typed after it, so typing an '=' by itself will match "nothing" (ie. an empty field). It seems the problem is that the = doesn't work consistently with the Omit function. When I tried entering = in the numeric field and selecting Omit, I still got some records with no data in the field. My specific application is a database that has 2 fields: MinimumSize & MaximumSize. I wanted to find all records in which both MinimumSize & MaximumSize were <2.2 but omit records that had no entry in MinimumSize. I used a find request with <2.2 entered in both fields and added another request with = in MinimumSize and Omit checked. Running this Find includes all records with sizes <2.2 but also includes some records with no data in either field. As a workaround, I used a range .001...2.2 in MinimumSize and <2.2 in MaximumSize. That works, but it would seem the = and Omit approach also should work to eliminate those dataless records. I can't say I've ever had any problems with '=' and Omit. Are you using the Omit option correctly (ie. type '=' into the field and set the Omit tickbox on the same Find request). snip |
I've just tried it and the '=' and Omit definitely works (for text,
number, date, time, and calculation fields).
Helpful Harry
"Just trying to help whenever I can."
)
#5
| |||
| |||
|
|
In article <010820030923304070%helpful_harry (AT) nom (DOT) de.plume.com>, Helpful Harry <helpful_harry (AT) nom (DOT) de.plume.com> wrote: In article <mXeWa.48$5f.34@lakeread05>, Cecil Bankston cbankston (AT) spamfreecox (DOT) net> wrote: Thanks Harry, Helpful Harry wrote: '*' will match fields containing zero or more characters, so isn't supposed to be used for numbers. A better way to find empty fields is to use the '=' symbol instead. The '=' symbol matches exactly what is typed after it, so typing an '=' by itself will match "nothing" (ie. an empty field). It seems the problem is that the = doesn't work consistently with the Omit function. When I tried entering = in the numeric field and selecting Omit, I still got some records with no data in the field. My specific application is a database that has 2 fields: MinimumSize & MaximumSize. I wanted to find all records in which both MinimumSize & MaximumSize were <2.2 but omit records that had no entry in MinimumSize. I used a find request with <2.2 entered in both fields and added another request with = in MinimumSize and Omit checked. Running this Find includes all records with sizes <2.2 but also includes some records with no data in either field. As a workaround, I used a range .001...2.2 in MinimumSize and <2.2 in MaximumSize. That works, but it would seem the = and Omit approach also should work to eliminate those dataless records. I can't say I've ever had any problems with '=' and Omit. Are you using the Omit option correctly (ie. type '=' into the field and set the Omit tickbox on the same Find request). snip I've just tried it and the '=' and Omit definitely works (for text, number, date, time, and calculation fields). The mystery is solved! When I viewed the "empty" fields of records that |
fields, I discovered they actually contained "0.0." That zero value
just appeared as a blank field in the layouts I normally used. I now am
in the process of finding and replacing all those 0.0 entries with "".
Thanks for the assistance.
--
Cecil N. Bankston
Baton Rouge, LA USA
 |
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
| |
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.