Skip to main content

Running Dynamic Code with ExecScript

The Wiki has an interesting post on how to run dynamic code. While much of the post deals with using BINDEVENT, I just want to make a note on ExecScript.

This is one of the best additions to Visual FoxPro. In one application, we used to offer the ability for users to write their own validation rules (provided they knew how to write FoxPro expressions). Now, we take it even further: they can write their own full scripts.

Not only that - but we offer popular rule "templates" that users can build their existing rules from and use TEXTMERGE to fill in the appropriate values.

How so?

A rule table with a field for
Rule Description (cdesc)
Rule Script (mrule)
Rule Parameter (cparm)

The code that executes the rule does a

EXECSCRIPT(TEXTMERGE(mrule,"*PARM*",cParm))

The user only needs to fill in the Rule Description and the parameter - everything else is hidden from them.

Our templates start with easy to use templates like : This field must be filled in or here is a valid list of values to "Don't allow this entry unless today's date is Dec 31 and the user's name is XXXX".

By using rule templates, more advanced support staff can write rules that others then simply re-use by filling in the templates.

Previously, we had a bunch of FXP files lying around in folders where people had to learn the expression and the parameters. With ExecScript, you can put all of these into a library of functions and call them with Friendly names.

"Oh you need to send an email to a user?" Instead of making them learn how to write SENDEMAIL.PRG, they can call a function library call like

CallFunction("Send Email", "person@company.com", "Hi")

This is almost like going back to macros in Excel and Lotus days, but it becomes infinitely easier on the end user.

If you've never used ExecScript, try it out.

It's been in Visual FoxPro since VFP 7.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Elevating Project Specifications with Three Insightful ChatGPT Prompts

For developers and testers, ChatGPT, the freely accessible tool from OpenAI, is game-changing. If you want to learn a new programming language, ask for samples or have it convert your existing code. This can be done in Visual Studio Code (using GitHub CoPilot) or directly in the ChatGPT app or web site.  If you’re a tester, ChatGPT can write a test spec or actual test code (if you use Jest or Cypress) based on existing code, copied and pasted into the input area. But ChatGPT can be of huge value for analysts (whether system or business) who need to validate their needs. There’s often a disconnect between developers and analysts. Analysts complain that developers don’t build what they asked for or ask too many questions. Developers complain that analysts haven’t thought of obvious things. In these situations, ChatGPT can be a great intermediary. At its worst, it forces you to think about and then discount obvious issues. At best, it clarifies the needs into documented requirements. ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Respect

Respect is something humans give to each other through personal connection. It’s the bond that forms when we recognize something—or someone—as significant, relatable, or worthy of care. This connection doesn’t have to be limited to people. There was an  article  recently that described the differing attitudes towards AI tools such as ChatGPT and Google Gemini (formerly Bard). Some people treat them like a standard search while others form a sort of personal relationship — being courteous, saying “please” and “thank you”. Occasionally, people share extra details unrelated to their question, like, ‘I’m going to a wedding. What flower goes well with a tuxedo?’ Does an AI “care” how you respond to it? Of course not — it reflects the patterns it’s trained on. Yet our interaction shapes how these tools evolve, and that influence is something we should take seriously. Most of us have all expressed frustration when an AI “hallucinates”. Real or not, the larger issue is that we have hi...
Post a Comment
Read more

Friend vs Therapist vs LLM: Shades of Grey

The conversations with AI series brings up a single point and then compares it between different LLM engines. These types of conversations were one of the many contributing factors to my writing of " Towards Consciousness " that explores the benefits and issues of creating a conscious AI. In this scenario, I was interested in seeing how an LLM might differ from a friend or therapist on issues that may have nuanced responses or contexts. In doing so, I came up with an interesting discussion on shades of grey. My Premise: Is it a bit strange to be using an LLM as a sober second thought? Every time I walk down this path of “why use an LLM to do certain things”, I come back to the alternatives that people like to say. “Why not bring it up with a friend?” A friend typically has your back or will say whatever to support their own agenda. “A therapist?” That’s someone who is “trained” to be impartial. But a computer? A computer is impartial based on two logical outcomes. If you say ...
Post a Comment
Read more