Read only

[Martin]

Hi there,

I can't seem to get object.readonly to work; can anyone tell me what I'm doing wrong?

I have a simple form (one browse, two memo fields) which I want to function in two ways, depending on the user type. When I set the Read Only tickbox for each object the form works perfectly for one type of user, when I untick the boxes for each object it works perfectly for the other type.

However, putting the following code in OnActivate for the form doesn't seem to make any difference (although there are no runtime errors). What am I doing wrong?

if userlevel = 1
:topparent.field1.readonly = .f.
:topparent.field2.readonly = .f.
:topparent.Browse1.readonly = .f.
else
:topparent.field1.readonly = .t.
:topparent.field2.readonly = .t.
:topparent.Browse1.readonly = .t.
end if

Thanks,

Martin.

[Tom Cone Jr]

RE: Read only

Martin, you must use colons, not periods, as the prefix for object names. The period is reserved as the prefix for a property of the named object.

instead of
:topparent.field1.readonly = .f.

do

   :topparent:field1.readonly = .f.

See the difference? 'field1' is an object name. It's not a property of the parent form.

-- tom

[Stan Mathews]

RE: Read only

After a sidebar, Tom and I agreed that it is proper to add that a period is used

For attaching a method. As in

:topparent.field1.refresh()

[Martin]

RE: Read only

Doh!

Of course! I had wrongly guessed first of all that this was a method and typed field.readonly(), but realising my mistake, failed to change the period.

Thanks, both,

Martin.

[Martin]

RE: Read only

I spoke too soon!

I've now tried that suggestion, Tom, and nothing seems to make any difference to the object fields. All that affects them is whether or not Read only is ticked in Properties.

:toparent:field.readonly = .t. (or .F.)

appears to make absolutely no difference to whether the contents of the field can or cannot be changed.

I've also tried:

topparent:field.readonly = .t.
field.readonly = .t.

- no effect whatever! What am I missing?

Martin.

[JerryBrightbill]

RE: Read only

Martin

Try

topparent:field.disable()

That will prevent editing the field.

Jerry

[Tom Cone Jr]

RE: Read only

Martin,

I strongly recommend you avoid naming fields 'field' when dropping them on your forms. -- tom

[JerryBrightbill]

RE: Read only

Actually, if you want to set the property to readonly instead of disabling, this will work.

topparent:Objectname.field.readonly = .T.

Your previous expression did not reference the object name.

Jerry

[Martin]

RE: Read only

It's not really called field, that was just for my example.

[JerryBrightbill]

RE: Read only

Martin

I finally read the original post and realize I didn't use your form object names. Here is oyur original code

if userlevel = 1
:topparent.field1.readonly = .f.
:topparent.field2.readonly = .f.
:topparent.Browse1.readonly = .f.
else
:topparent.field1.readonly = .t.
:topparent.field2.readonly = .t.
:topparent.Browse1.readonly = .t.
end if

here is the correct code with the same names

if userlevel = 1
:topparent:field1.field.readonly = .f.
:topparent:field2.field.readonly = .f.
:topparent:Browse1.browse.readonly = .f.
else
:topparent:field1.field.readonly = .T.
:topparent:field2.field.readonly = .T.
:topparent:Browse1.browse.readonly = .T.
end if

The confusuion here comes from the object names on your form (browse1, field1, etc). While Alpha creates the default name for a browse as browse1, it is sometimes easier to rename all object with more descriptive names. This makes object references less confusing.

Jerry

[Martin]

RE: Read only

Bingo!

That's got it! (And replace "field" with "browse", for the browse, of course.)

Many thanks, Jerry and all,

Martin

[Martin]

RE: Read only

Agreed. I think I'm responsible for the confusion because I thought I was being helpful by calling my examples field1, field2, etc. (I, too, always re-name them) but I had the reverse effect!

All OK now, though, thanks to everyone,

Martin.