I had to use a custom help in a program because I was not able to do it properly with the standard matchcode (I failed miserabily trying to pass the F4 a pre-filter). I had to do a workaround, and I must prevent my failing memory to forget it forever… here we come, just a bit of plain code.
Just a few, because I want not to forget it…
– RS_ALL_VARIANTS_4_1_REPORT: providing the name of the report (sy-repid), and just by putting ‘*’ in the TEXT parameter, you will get a table with all the variants of the program.
– RS_VARIANT_CATALOG: (online only?) by providing a program’s name, the system will show a pop-up window with the variants’ list of the program. The user can select one of them, who will be returned in the exporting parameters.
– RS_VARIANT_CONTENTS: just tell this beauty the program and its variant’s name, and it will give you a VALUTAB table parameter with its variable contents.
Why some self-called ‘developers’ create module-pools if they don’t understand the whole concept of them? Where’s the sense of create a module-pool for each action of the same concept? Why must I find a module-pool for create data, another one for display it, and a third one to delete them? Where did those self-called ‘developers’ learn about the module-pool thing?
Maybe I’m the one who’s wrong, but I ever supposed a module-pool is a bunch of code pieces and screens, that, under the same concept, allow the easy maintenance of a business concept’s actions. I mean, if I must maintain the object Ob, I will create a SINGLE module-pool, with enough code pieces (modules) and screens to be able to maintain all the Ob’s properties. I will save time and space if I can use a single screen and block and/or hide its useless items when they are not needed…
Then I’ll decide if I want a single transaction or more of them, calling the proper screen, who will block by itself its parts what will not be used by the calling transaction. It will save time and space, and, better than this, will make my life easier when the users will ask me to modify the screen. Think about it: I will to modify ONE screen, when all those self-called ‘developers’ will must to modify three or more.
Why people cannot (or want not) learn the advantages of a tool before to use it?
I’ve tried to find a good set of function modules to add/subtract months to/from dates. I’ve not find none that appealed me. Continue reading
I’m a confused mind. It’s something natural being a chimp, but it doesn’t help too much to my productivity. When I’m feeling “unfocused” or too tired to continue with my current task, I find easy ways to rest my mind. Sadly, personal situations affect my worktime (as they do to everyone but robots and jedi knights), and when I’m tired my rest times tend to space themselves shorter (more rests, less work… it hurts… to my work). Continue reading
I’m almost six years old here. And I’m starting to feel I can do my work with the same knowledge I had when I started to develop in ABAP. It’s not about compatibility, it’s about evolution. If I didn’t need to learn new tricks to continue doing my work, it means ABAP is optimized? I don’t think so.
What does it mean, then?
It means two things (or more): I will be able to continue being an ABAPer without any kind of effort (wow!) and I will be able to continue using unoptimized techniques (ouch!). The quality of my work relies absolutely over my will. And I don’t have will (not time) enough to seek new ways to do old things. From time to time a question here raises an answer that shows me a new way, that I try to append to my developing “tools”, but no more.
I’m still working with programs which use of unoptimized (and weird) coding makes my worktime a hell. The code works, of course (more or less), but each change I must do takes too much time because the use of things like “OCCURS 0 WITH HEADER LINE” or “TABLES:”. And I don’t have enough time (nor my boss wants me to invest time on it) to fix/upgrade/optimize those old sentences.
I’m still finding (from time to time) old-school coders (doh! how many people will call me “old-school coder” now?) who still use sentences like the ones I said you. Why? Because they don’t need to evolve. It’s their fault or SAP’s? Am I the only one who feels sad because that? Or maybe all you had enough will/time/luck to be able to evolve your programs (and your skills) to use optimized calls?
Doh, I’m still trying to find time to test my old objects skills with ABAP
More Doh’es… I just had some kind of dejà vu (matrix error?) when thinking about to post this post in the TI blog, and though “I though it before”. And I was right. I wrote about this kind of things there: Evolution needed?
I think I failed miserably trying to evolve myself. But it’s not just my fault only. I think someone in Walldorf shall start to remove some sentences/adds from ABAP, before we’ll be too used to use them.
I needed to create a program to keep control of my transport requests… Here it comes 🙂