[AccessD] Nz function in Access 2002

I did a check of kbAlertz and there is no follow-up KB article posted
yet.  So whatever is the unstated problem with NZ(), they haven't posted
a fix yet.

Charles Wortz 
Software Development Division 
Texas Education Agency 
1701 N. Congress Ave 
Austin, TX 78701-1494 
512-463-9493 
CWortz at tea.state.tx.us 

-----Original Message-----
From: William Hindman [mailto:wdhindman at bellsouth.net] 
Sent: Thursday 2003 Mar 06 14:27
To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com
Subject: Re: [AccessD] Nz function in Access 2002


...this is a prime example of Microsoft geek writing ...the reason I
never buy anything from MS Press ...I'll be damned if I can figure out
what it is that the nz function doesn't quite perform "as expected"? :(
 
...I use nz in several AXP apps and to date have noticed nothing that I
didn't expect ...but with this kind of crap KB, I'll be certain to waste
a lot of time the next time I use it, just futzing about looking for
some kind of error in the returned data :(((((
 
...I don't know whether to thank Charlotte for pointing this out or mail
her my dirty laundry instead :(
 
William Hindman ...ok, I won't mail her my dirty laundry ...probably
upset my post lady :)

	----- Original Message ----- 
	From: Charlotte Foust <mailto:cfoust at infostatsystems.com>  
	To: AccessD at databaseadvisors.com 
	Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 1:56 PM
	Subject: [AccessD] Nz function in Access 2002


	I ran across an MSKB article today
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;295619
<http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;295619>  that
says the Nz function works in 2002 but it may not work as expected!  Say
what??   It works, but it doesn't?

	Has anyone run into this?  Nz isn't always the most appropriate
function, but I've never seen it fail, at least not that I knew about.
We use this a lot, and I'm concerned about migrating our apps from 97 to
2002 and having a lot of code fall over.  I wondered if it could be the
result of not passing in the optional argument, but the article seemed
rather vague to me.  Does anyone else have first-hand knowledge of the
problem?

	Charlotte Foust 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://databaseadvisors.com/pipermail/accessd/attachments/20030306/a6d5a88b/attachment-0001.html>