RE: 25/11/2019 RNS28 Nov 2019 07:56
You have to be careful though, NE.
According the other site, unless you know someone personally, you cannot know anything about them?????
So David and Victoria Beckam , the Queen and Prince Phillip , and countless couples may not be be couples at all?? And do they even exists?? And googling the internet is not allowed in his book - which explains his ignorance. I really don't wonder if Einstein ever read a book - the google of his day? It is great the proponent of this nonsense calls me stupid - I'd seriously worry if he thought I was as bright as himself. I feel like Herbert Lom (Chief Inspector Dreyfus) in the Pink Panther, Donk is my Clouseau without the humour. I'll have to filter him before I shoot off a thumb.
I helped get ASX/TOU up to 9.2c last night. My break even is less than 9.7c now and my losses less severe.
My search engine is still being tested (that's why I see Donk's messages - ADVFN is full of him) after a collosal screw up on my part.
Visual studio is dangerous!
I had three copies of one subroutine, an old one which worked (synchronising the web pages) but without new features, the new features version which looped on some options, and a working versversion built from the two!
My mistake was not removing the HANDLES from the 2 reference versions, named OLDListbox1, and NewListbox1, whilst LISTBOX1 was the one I thought I was working on.
At the top of the screen you have two columns, one for the object i.e. Listbox1 , and another for the interrupt address (load,close,etc). Because all three handles referred to Listbox1 I was directed to any one of the three I think.
Once the error was apparent, I tried ctrl/z and ctrl/y but eventually you get a message to either accept or abort the changes or lose amendments. Autosave is running and from there it is pot luck!
If you have worked with Excel,you'll know how confusing the recovery process is - this is far more obscure - I'm rewriting it to a different design so the routines are generic and thee isn't bespoke code for each type of search. Shame I did not plan that approach from the start.
I'm putting off returning to the spaghetti - sorry - I hope somebody got something from that.
Basically have inique handles in your code! And none on obsolete routines?