Search results

And, of course, it will work.

Thank you both for your comments. I still prefer my method but I accept it may not align with good practice.

The reason being that I can make the search easier using one field rather than 12? I can search for single months or multiple months (seasons, but not exclusively). By my thinking, 400 records X 12 fields is a lot more than 400 fields...and would use less coding.

Yes. The check boxes are initialised to ensure a two-state operation, and the code determines whether each is True or False. That part of the code is completed a working satisfactorily. The code tests for True or False so won't look for values. In other circumstances, I tend to use an...

Thanks for that but I'm not looking at the binary method, having looked at the code, it seems a lot of effort for little return. I am now clearer in my mind that my originally suggested method is the way to go. I will have unbound 12 check boxes and a separate field that has 12 symbols...

Thanks to all for your replies. I am going away to study and digest them... Thanks again. DaveE

Thanks for that... I've always wondered about using one-to-many table relationships. In the context of data being repeated a lot within the db, I've always used one-to-many. In this db, however, the plant has one unique flowering pattern so, I think, it can be held within the same table. A...

Hi CJ, Indeed, that would be the method, with the field being 'decoded' into months dependent upon each code bit. The string would be inspected by a looping VBA procedure on the OnCurrent event. And yes, some flowers have two flowering periods in a single year, so this method would cater for...

Thanks, Bob. I have considered that but the issue of storing, retrieving and decoding the data remains.

I would welcome suggestions on the subject of economy, and efficiency, of field-use and VBA coding. I have a gardening db which is recording all relevant data about plants in my garden. It has gone well over the years and, with some help from other members of the forum, is improving year on...

Forget the current OP, Pat. This is becoming a trend for you. You're showing a genuine lack of patience and the wording of your replies are sometimes demeaning to users looking for answers, not incivility. It's not that you need to seek forgiveness from anyone but you should count to 10...

You've lost the patient approach you used to have, Pat; not the same Pat from 20 years ago. I have a personal rule that says I won't be rude unless someone is rude to me. It might help you.

There are some who have been on the site a very long time and have lost the art of tact and gained a more supercilious attitude. It's not the first time I've noticed a senior member alienate a poster.

Sorry I missed your post - Yes I have Option Explicit declared in each module.

No, the form is already open and the Call is to an existing Command button within the same form.

That's interesting, moke123. But that code you examined had a bug which would cause the database to close spontaneously while moving from form view to design view. I have, on occasion, had error messages about the odd undeclared variable used in some code, but not often. Being undeclared doesn't...

My orginal post does indicate that the Call is self-contained within the one form. The code calls a routine on another object within the form's code. That I was replicating a similar call on another form may have caused unintended confusion.

No, the form name is correct and is opened by code on other forms without a problem. I had tried several different styles of the same command without success but on the main form, it works perfectly.

Hi Pat, I find the forum useful most times. The last problem I had was resolved although the root of the problem was never discovered. This time, I had chosen to use the Call Me.Command### as I'd never used it before and saw an opportunity, within my database, to try it out. It worked well on...

Yes, I omitted the Commandbutton number but the syntax was correct and, no, it didn't work. I used several ways as suggested by other online sources without success. The code, although it won't work, does compile without error.