Re: Disabling Commit and Update

From: Alan Mills <Alan.Mills_at_xservices.pants.fujitsu.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 16:26:17 +0100
Message-ID: <bfm9hh$1i0p$1_at_news.icl.se>


"Jim" <jim_esti_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message news:f0e3dc0b.0307211014.3b7ee8f1_at_posting.google.com...
> Hello,
>
> I have a basic form and a post button.
> The user is able to view and query a particular table.
>
> When the user presses the post button some calculations are done and
> the table they where looking at is updated via the post button only.
> The calculations and features behind the post button are to
> specialized and complex to do via update trigger or commit trigger.
>
> I can write the post button so that it updates the table correctly.
> What I want to do is disable the user's ability to Commit and Update
> that table via another means than that post button. When I try to add
> triggers to the block the Commit and Updates it effects the updates
> and commits I do on the POST button.
>
> How can one disable the Commit and Update keys/process and yet be able
> to do the same functionality on a button? The only way I want to let
> the user Commit or update is via this post button.
>
> Any Ideas?

Having more thoughts on this....

I'm still not sure why you need to disable the KEY-COMMIT function key. Presumably, your button contains a simple call to COMMIT_FORM to do your changes. As such, how and why is the processing different to pressing the commit function key?

If there is any other code in your button press, i.e. some processing either side of the call to COMMIT_FORM then you are in trouble for another reason.

Any attempt to clear a block or the form when changes are made (in the local block of course) will result in a 'Do you want to commit your changes' question. Hitting yes to this will bypass your button press completely, effectively calling COMMIT_FORM directly.

How have you got around this problem? Just another reason to make sure you use standard commit processing sequences and triggers. Received on Wed Jul 23 2003 - 17:26:17 CEST

Original text of this message