Subject Re: [IBO] RecordCount
Author Shane van de Vorstenbosch
If you do change the field, my recommendation is to change the names to
"RecordCountTotal" and "RecordCountInBuffer". That way when a person does
use the RecordCount function, they will then automatically find the other
two functions with the autocomplete feature.

There is nothing worse than trying to find a related function where the
start of the name has changed. It means that it has moved in the
alphabetical list of functions/properties, in the help file and in the code

One other suggestion would be to also put in a RecordCountNotZero. It would
appear to me that the two most common uses for the RecordCount is to loop
through the records or to test to ensure that the query returned some data.
It would simply return the negated IsEmpty function, but with the benefit
that it appears when the programmer is looking for the RecordCount function.

Dropping the function, however, means that some people can not migrate
easily to IBObjects. I agree, however, that it means that they will also be
forced to fix their code.

Best regards,

----- Original Message -----
From: "Aage Johansen" <aagjohan@...>
To: <>
Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2000 10:30 AM
Subject: [IBO] RecordCount

> Maybe the best solution for the RecordCount problems would be to remove or
> rename the RecordCount feature. And, I'm not kidding.
> 1. During conversion of a BDE project you will get error messages so you
> will have to fix the problem.
> 2. You should avoid the RecordCount like the plague, and if you really
> an estimate of <number of records> you do a 'select count ...'. When you
> use a where clause (just counting a small part of the table) performance
> will probably be tolerable. Give your users a choice: great performance
> not-so-great performance. Or, just say no! to <number of records> ...
> Regards,
> Aage J.