Ernest
My feedback
22 results found
-
13 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Ernest
supported this idea
·
-
11 votesErnest
supported this idea
·
-
4 votesErnest
supported this idea
·
-
11 votesErnest
supported this idea
·
-
3 votesErnest
supported this idea
·
-
11 votesErnest
supported this idea
·
-
14 votesErnest
supported this idea
·
-
7 votesErnest
supported this idea
·
-
5 votesErnest
supported this idea
·
-
74 votesErnest
supported this idea
·
-
7 votesErnest
supported this idea
·
-
7 votesErnest
supported this idea
·
-
10 votes
We are researching what it would take to implement this request, but we know the scope and size of the project before we can put it into our development roadmap
Ernest
supported this idea
·
-
5 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Ernest
commented
This would eliminate the need to have to build long strings of parenthetically grouped "OR" constraints.
For example, if we were interested in STU records for 5 specific students (numbered 1 through 5, in this contrived example)...
...rather than:
IF ( STU.ID = 1 OR STU.ID = 2 OR STU.ID = 3 OR STU.ID = 4 OR STU.ID = 5 )...we could use something along the lines of:
IF STU.ID IN (1, 2, 3, 4, 5)Ernest
supported this idea
·
-
13 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Ernest
commented
Add support for filtering an Aeries Query based on the current date/time, at runtime.
For example, to list staff (STF) and their active job assignments (STJ), one might use a query similar to the following:
LIST STJ ID SCL JC SD ED IF ( SD = NULL OR SD <= 'MM/DD/YYYY' ) AND ( ED = NULL OR ED >= 'MM/DD/YYYY' )
While this works, it requires users to adjust the date each time they execute it.
If support were added for a "current date" function, like the built-in T-SQL function "getdate()", this Aeries query might be rewritten as:
LIST STJ ID SCL JC SD ED IF ( SD = NULL OR SD <= (( GETDATE() )) ) AND ( ED = NULL OR ED >= (( GETDATE() )) )
NOTE: The above query does not work. It is provided as an example of how support for a current-date function might be implemented.
Ernest
supported this idea
·
-
22 votesErnest
supported this idea
·
-
9 votesErnest
supported this idea
·
-
6 votesErnest
supported this idea
·
-
6 votesErnest
supported this idea
·
-
35 votesErnest
supported this idea
·
Because red-flagged contacts display at the top, regardless of their set contact order, manual adjustments to the contacts' order assigns the starting number/index (i.e.: 0, zero) to the red-flagged contact.
Consider adding logic to the re-ordering algorithm to order red-flagged contacts (i.e.: CON.RF = 1) after non-red-flagged contacts. They can still display before non-red-flagged contacts.