I've been having  this problem i few times now and its really bogging me down. Does anyone know what causes it or how to correct it?

I've tried the usual. Saving the form/table under another name then deleting and re-creating. But I still have the problem.

When i try to create a new field on an existing form/table i notice that it does not give the usual recomended field name ie, "field 49". when i enter a name in the field name area then try to save i get the "Error 503 Adding Field. Missing operator in formula".

Any help on this would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks

Kevin

I always forget to add that this is in DE8.5 latest version.

I think this one is easy to explain.

In DE85 there is a lot of "original" features that has been re-instated for very good reasons.

A lot of things was "hardcoded" to behave different than originally designed in DFW 5.x/6.x/7.x. 

A couple of these features is:

Size of Record Object.

Main Form Record Object was hardcoded to be the same size as Form Object. This was most likely done to avoid getting exactly the same problem you have now.... ;-)

This was changed in 8.0 simply because moving and re-sizing Record object is very very very useful.

The reason you have this problem is because your record object is set (size to fit). So it now fits your existing objects on scree so your new field is outside the record object.

If you change the colour of the record object or the form object you will see this.

The only thing you need to do is to resize the record object manually (drag it out and make it larger than your screen) and you won't get this problem.

Defining a new stored field can only be done on the Main Form Record object of a Form that defines table. But you can also define fields everywhere else but these will not own a table and cannot be referenced by another field (directly). 

But with SetValue()/GetValue() you can now use form virtual fields for input as well as  you can simply pick the values out of them which can be very useful in many different ways.

One limitation is that a Form Virtual field need a derivation.... so if you had put in a derivation of "" for instance you would have gotten rid of the error message but you would then most likely have been very surprised that your column didn't exist in the table ;-)

Sorry for the background information but the only thing you need to do is to resize your main record object and make sure you are inside it when you create new fields.

That doesn't seem to fix the problem. Would you like me to post a copy to you its pretty small?

yes, please ;-)

I hope it attached properly.

user Kevin

pw 1350

Hi Kevin. 

You sent us only a DBM file i.e. data file of one table.

How about this

Hi Kevin, which form is it?



I suspect it is BarclaySte ?

As you see here there is non of the above forms that defines the table, just "use" it.

 

If you check this box you will be able to claim back ownership and hence define as many columns as you like.

When this is switch off you can either insert existing columns or define new "form virtual" columns as described earlier.

The "dead giveaway" is that the field definition dialog allow you to select existing columns in the FieldName field ;-)
 

yes, Barclayste

I'm glad it was a simple problem. I don't know how it became unchecked and why didn't i see that.

Thank you !!  for you help.  

We are equally glad that it was a simple problem.

These things happens and sometimes one only need a fresh set of eyes to see the "obvious".

When one work a lot with something one see what one "want" to see after a while. We have all been there many a times (daily... ;-)