Skip to main content

Pet Peeves: _SCREEN.Activeform

While it's a great product, there are just times that FoxPro really drives me nuts.

A great example? _SCREEN.Activeform.

I know people have ranted about this for years so now it's my turn.

_SCREEN.Activeform returns a pointer to the current form object. But what if there's no current form?

Does it return NULL? An empty string?

No. It errors out.

Does anyone know what the reasoning was here?

Now, you can verify it by doing

IF TYPE("_SCREEN.Activeform")="U"
** Now you KNOW there's no form there.
ELSE
ENDIF

but then you still have to do a

IF NOT ISNULL(_SCREEN.Activeform)

ENDIF

Note that you can't use VARTYPE() because Activeform isn't a variable. (example : VARTYPE(_SCREEN.activeform)) - which is a shame because VARTYPE is the faster of the two.

In that blog post, if you read the comments, you'll hear things like "use PEMSTATUS" instead of Type for objects but the problem here is that ActiveForm IS a valid property for _SCREEN (unless you actually want to refer to it).

I thought I could be clever and maybe look at _SCREEN.FormCount but guess what? If a form is defined but hidden, the ActiveForm is still not there but FormCount is 1.

So the end result is you HAVE to use the slower, uglier type approach to get out of these annoying checks for _SCREEN.Activeform.

IF TYPE("_SCREEN.Activeform")<>"U"
** do something with it - _SCREEN.Activeform
ELSE
** don't do anything otherwise you'll error out.
ENDIF

Now will users notice the performance penalty? That's a tough call - but I do know that it adds three unnecessary lines of code which adds to the Refactorability of a program.

Comments

Anonymous said…
I usually use
IF TYPE("_SCREEN.Activeform.Name") = "C"
*- Do something with it
ENDIF

The typecheck for the property digs into the object if it exists. The type-function internal error catch will catch the error (but sets the MESSAGE() returned value. what's up with that, anyhow?)
No need for the ISNULL() check.

Sietse Wijnker
April 20, 2006 at 10:06 AM
Anonymous said…
If you have an ActiveX control on a form sometimes _SCREEN.ActiveForm refers to the control, not to the form it's on. I haven't tested if this bug has been fixed in the meantime, because our framework has a method to return the active form that deals with it.
April 20, 2006 at 10:50 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Merry Christmas

Whether you celebrate now, have already celebrated your past holiday, are planning to, or not, I hope you find yourself surrounded by family and those you love during this holiday season and are able to remember fondly those who are not with you. We often find ourselves buried in work, or too distracted by other problems, to share and remember a few moments with those closest to us. So many of us are separated by huge distances, we often find it easier to focus on those who are out of arm's reach yet so easy to connect with online, instead of those who are right beside us. So do yourself a favour, put down the keyboard (stylus, mouse, etc) and spend that time. I know I will. Merry Christmas. Powered by ScribeFire .
4 comments
Read more

Who Wants To Be Logical? I Do! I Don't! (with Claude)

In my book, Towards Consciousness, I explore PET , a theory that attempts to explain consciousness and possibly how it might apply to AI. As part of the conversations with AI series, I've included this conversation with Claude.AI in which we were talking about something very different and yet the conversation redirected itself back to PET. For the record, there is no such thing as "Colfsity". A It's interesting to me that people want to proclaim their distinction from being rigid and unlike machines, yet they also complain that the "best" people keep a rigid schedule, regular routines and logic understanding of issues. That's a perceptive observation about a real tension in how people think about themselves and what they value. There does seem to be this paradox where rigidity is simultaneously rejected as "robotic" or inhuman, yet praised when it appears as discipline, consistency, or logical thinking. I think part of what's happening is t...
Post a Comment
Read more

Programmers vs. Developers vs. Architects

I received an email this morning from Brandon Savage 's newsletter. Brandon's a PHP guru (works at Mozilla) but his newsletter and books have some great overall perspectives for developers of all languages. However, this last one (What's the difference between developers and architects?) kind of rubs me the wrong way. Either that, or I've just missed the natural inflation of job descriptions. (maybe, it's like the change in terminology between Garbage man and Waste Engineer or Secretary and Office Administrator) So maybe it's just me - but I think there's still a big difference between Programmer, Developer and then of course, architect. The key thing here is that every role has a different perspective and every one of those perspectives has value. The original MSF create roles like Product Manager, Program Manager, Developer, Tester, etc - so every concept may pigeon hole people into different roles. But the statements Brandon makes are often distinction...
11 comments
Read more