SQL Server, you are starting to annoy me
-
The Table designers allow you to edit the table's structure. So when you click print, what does it print: the actual saved definition or the one that appears in your screen (edited but not saved)? I agree that the tools must provide some other way to print the info, like right-click on a Table and click 'Print Definition' or something of that sort.
Print what's on the screen. You don't expect Word to print the document on disk, rather than the one in memory, do you?
Software Zen:
delete this; -
You may ask for help in the Q&A: there is a very knowledgeable Welsh guy...
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler. -- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong. -- Iain Clarke
[My articles] -
OK, Mr. AndyInEngland. :rolleyes:
If the Lord God Almighty had consulted me before embarking upon the Creation, I would have recommended something simpler. -- Alfonso the Wise, 13th Century King of Castile.
This is going on my arrogant assumptions. You may have a superb reason why I'm completely wrong. -- Iain Clarke
[My articles] -
Why the heck can't either SQL Server Management Studio or the VS SQL table designer print the table definition? They both show on screen exactly what I want: field name, type, size and null permitted, but print is greyed out! :mad: Why? How difficult can it be, when they will print anything else? Damn it, I'll just have to print a screen dump. Stupid, stupid, stupid. Sorry about that, I feel better now...
Real men don't use instructions. They are only the manufacturers opinion on how to put the thing together. Manfred R. Bihy: "Looks as if OP is learning resistant."
Are you one of those people who want someone else to do all your work for you? I mean had Microsoft(in the head) actually provided this function for you, what else would you do with your time. More postings on CP I guess ;)
Steve Jowett ------------------------- Real Programmers don't need comments -- the code is obvious.
-
Are you one of those people who want someone else to do all your work for you? I mean had Microsoft(in the head) actually provided this function for you, what else would you do with your time. More postings on CP I guess ;)
Steve Jowett ------------------------- Real Programmers don't need comments -- the code is obvious.
Steven J Jowett wrote:
what else would you do with your time. More postings on CP I guess
Doubtfull - I have to sleep sometimes... :laugh:
Real men don't use instructions. They are only the manufacturers opinion on how to put the thing together. Manfred R. Bihy: "Looks as if OP is learning resistant."
-
Steven J Jowett wrote:
what else would you do with your time. More postings on CP I guess
Doubtfull - I have to sleep sometimes... :laugh:
Real men don't use instructions. They are only the manufacturers opinion on how to put the thing together. Manfred R. Bihy: "Looks as if OP is learning resistant."
OriginalGriff wrote:
I have to sleep sometimes
There's plenty of time for that when your life-time warranty expires.
Steve Jowett ------------------------- Real Programmers don't need comments -- the code is obvious.
-
Thanks, I found that on t'interweb - I wasn't after an answer, I just wanted to release some frustration. :laugh: But seriously, why the heck not add it? It's a pretty obvious thing to want, I would have thought? Ah. This is Microsoft, I forgot. "If the user is likely to want it, they can go stuff themselves" - silly me! :-D
Real men don't use instructions. They are only the manufacturers opinion on how to put the thing together. Manfred R. Bihy: "Looks as if OP is learning resistant."
OriginalGriff wrote:
"If the user is likely to want it, they can go stuff themselves"
No, only if it makes sense and the majority want it; if it's stoopid and only a few users want it, they'll add it and turn it on by default.
-
Why the heck can't either SQL Server Management Studio or the VS SQL table designer print the table definition? They both show on screen exactly what I want: field name, type, size and null permitted, but print is greyed out! :mad: Why? How difficult can it be, when they will print anything else? Damn it, I'll just have to print a screen dump. Stupid, stupid, stupid. Sorry about that, I feel better now...
Real men don't use instructions. They are only the manufacturers opinion on how to put the thing together. Manfred R. Bihy: "Looks as if OP is learning resistant."
That's why the DB tool I wrote has a DESCRIBE command.
-
OriginalGriff wrote:
they can go stuff themselves stick their head in a pig
ftfy
Panic, Chaos, Destruction. My work here is done. Drink. Get drunk. Fall over - P O'H OK, I will win to day or my name isn't Ethel Crudacre! - DD Ethel Crudacre I cannot live by bread alone. Bacon and ketchup are needed as well. - Trollslayer Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb - they're often *students*, for heaven's sake - Terry Pratchett
cooked pig? BACON!!!
Programming is a race between programmers trying to build bigger and better idiot proof programs, and the universe trying to build bigger and better idiots, so far... the universe is winning. Be careful which toes you step on today, they might be connected to the foot that kicks your butt tomorrow. You can't scare me, I have children.
-
Print what's on the screen. You don't expect Word to print the document on disk, rather than the one in memory, do you?
Software Zen:
delete this; -
Gary Wheeler wrote:
Print what's on the screen.
And what if you don't save the new definition after printing?
It's no different from millions upon millions of other 'document' applications. In this case, the document is a descriptor for a data base. The user works with a document in memory: changing it, printing it, whatever. If they save it, fine; we modify the structure of the data base as they've specified. If they don't save it, so what? We did what they told us to do.
Software Zen:
delete this;
