Search results

I've worked in IT for 20+ years, assuming the worst with Microsoft is absolutely warranted. Keeping in mind the project was meant for GR over 18 months ago and it's not even listed as in development anymore. It's not ambiguity - it's not on the roadmap, assume it doesn't exist/will never ship...

The roadmap was marked as cancelled. The statement from the Access team was : Slightly poor wording on my part on the post, I admit, I should have said "which was cancelled", rather than "and was cancelled". But the fact that it's not on the roadmap at all, makes me feel that March 2023 is...

Monaco was removed from the Access Roadmap and marked as Cancelled. In fact if you look at the roadmap for Access it has nothing in the "In Development" section at all any more...

I'm old enough to remember when Intellisense was first available(as a paid product from a third party) for SQL Management Studio and the joy of tab complete that came with it. I'm also old enough to have written backup schedules in NT3.5 using AT commands. I am not against a GUI at all, but I do...

Interesting, thank you. I'm absolutely not a developer but I prefer to write SQL queries directly rather than use the QBE as my background includes a bit of SQL Server DBA time. I'd like Access to lose it's paranthesis fetish though :)

Actually, I've just realised - your query is the reverse of what I wanted in that returns all the rows where B match, I need the ones where they don't! So swapping the "=" for "<>" to give me SELECT A AS GoodA FROM YourTableName GROUP BY A HAVING MIN(B) <> MAX(B) is all I need for the...

Perfect, thank you! Could I ask why you would do the second step as a join rather than doing a SELECT A, B FROM tablename WHERE A NOT IN(SELECT A AS GoodA...) ? Just for my own edification :)

Difficult to come up with a title that makes sense for this one. I'm sure there is an obvious and simple solution to this query, but it's evading my tiny brain... This query is part of some error trapping of a more complicated piece, but essentially what I am trying to get to is to identify...

It doesn't need to be editable, fortunately, there is an Edit button for each record on the form which opens a modal popup form that has all of the details of the contact on. I know they aren't, but temp tables always feels a bit like cheating to me.

Yep, that's pretty much what I am going to do(alias joins), I just liked the loop idea more and felt it was an idea worth following to see if it could be done.

That was a lot of words to say you don't actually know... As I have said, I'm going to do it another way, please carefully climb back down off of your high horse before you fall off and hurt yourself.

It is repainted, but that doesn't change the point that Access knows where the recordset pointer is and what data is in which row of the form. This is why you can do things like colours per row. Anyway, as you say there are other ways of getting the data in, and I can potentially hide the empty...

I think I'm just going to do this another way to be honest, I liked the concept of looping through the recordset as it felt like a nice clean way of doing it, but as pointed out by MajP, there are other ways of doing it.

That was the point of my question and I gave the example of referring to the row in the form as the link to the recordset pointer in the clone. Access knows where the pointer is during and after the form has loaded, so it must have a reference that links the form row to the recordset to populate...

Yes, I know, I don't think I said it was otherwise?

Yes, like I said, I know this, you don't need to say it any other way, I already said if I could bind the textboxes then I wouldn't be here asking the question because I could just... bind the textboxes and it wouldn't be a problem. My point is that bound or unbound the record pointer points to...

I'm not sure how that would help, because if I could bind the textboxes to the recordset, then I wouldn't need to loop through it in VBA. I guess what I'm asking is that as Access knows it's absoluteposition in the recordset and that this is used to populate each rows bound fields on the form...

I was aware of that, what I was hoping was that because I had a recordsetclone of the data used to build each row of the form that there was a way to get the unbound fields populated in the same way that Access itself uses to generate the bound fields.

I've got a continuous form that has three unbound textboxes, named "linked_swimmer1", "linked_swimmer2" and "linked_swimmer3" on. The form is a list of contact names and I am looking to display the people these contacts are linked to and but only show the unbound textboxes where there are...

Thank you to everyone who responded, I didn't expect such a speedy and helpful bunch of people to show up to try to help me :)