An admin can move/delete the post, I just wanted to signal this

Maybe not that hard given what is pinned to the very top of this forum.scrumthing wrote: ↑Fri Jul 16, 2021 2:45 pm Currently it somewhat becomes hard to keep track of the new versions.
It’s on my own laptop only. I was still on 2.0.8 from 2 years back so that was about time to move on.Alan Kirk wrote: ↑Fri Jul 16, 2021 8:06 pmMaybe not that hard given what is pinned to the very top of this forum.scrumthing wrote: ↑Fri Jul 16, 2021 2:45 pm Currently it somewhat becomes hard to keep track of the new versions.
I was aware of the release, but I don't always have time to write it up on the very day of release. Besides, anyone enthusiastic enough to throw themselves into the abyss of a bleeding edge release on day 1 is free to do so, but I don't feel comfortable holding their hand.![]()
My conundrum is this; as per my profile at the time of writing I'm still on 2.0.6 which goes out of support in a couple of months. We're in the midst of a finance systems transformation project at the moment and will want to go live when the time comes with a supported version of TM1. Sooooo... do I commit to 2.0.9.9 (given that contrary to IBM's view, upgrading production software in most companies of more than 5 people does NOT involve "Oh yeah, let's just run an update"), or do I play it "safe" and stick to say 2.0.9.7? I probably WOULD have gone for the latter, save for the number of "blow up the server" bug fixes in 2.0.9.9. Thankfully I don't have to make the call quite yet and will have time to see whether there is a repeat performance of what happened with 2.0.9.8.Wim Gielis wrote: ↑Fri Jul 16, 2021 8:09 pmIt’s on my own laptop only. I was still on 2.0.8 from 2 years back so that was about time to move on.Alan Kirk wrote: ↑Fri Jul 16, 2021 8:06 pmMaybe not that hard given what is pinned to the very top of this forum.scrumthing wrote: ↑Fri Jul 16, 2021 2:45 pm Currently it somewhat becomes hard to keep track of the new versions.
I was aware of the release, but I don't always have time to write it up on the very day of release. Besides, anyone enthusiastic enough to throw themselves into the abyss of a bleeding edge release on day 1 is free to do so, but I don't feel comfortable holding their hand.![]()
"But it doesn't comply with our strat-teh-gee. Our strat-teh-gee is not to provide any functionality or fix any bugs that users who have already forked over their money (regularly and in large volumes) want and/or need unless it coincides with something that we can use in a sales presentation to lure in more potential suck...er, customers.Wim Gielis wrote: ↑Fri Jul 16, 2021 8:38 pm To IBM: is it so freaking difficult to ask whether "ActiveWorkbook Is Nothing" ? Yes or No ? True or False ?
Yup. They've been pretty blunt that they won't be doing jack to Perspectives in the future, not even one lousy line of code.Wim Gielis wrote: ↑Fri Jul 16, 2021 8:38 pm Because if indeed 1 or more workbooks do exist prior to asking for an active form, it works fine. But the active form is created in a separate workbook, therefore an active workbook is actually not needed at the time of the active form. Anyways, seems to be never solved this one. 1 line of code![]()
This isn't due to a mix match of bit versions is it? My guess would be you have a 32 bit version of excel and it's opening a 64 bit version of the application. If excel is 32 bit make sure the tm1p.xla the perspectives shortcut points to is in the bin folder, not the bin64 folder. Also may need to run this to finish the job..Wim Gielis wrote: ↑Fri Jul 16, 2021 8:38 pm
You start TM1 Perspectives from the Windows Start menu. Excel opens fine with some other addins (of mine, and Jedox, a.o.). No workbook is active/opened. You use TM1 > Explorer to log on in Perspectives. You open a view on a random cube and ask for an Active form to Excel. Nothing out of the ordinary I would say.
You may want to take a closer read of the previous two posts; Wim already spells out why the errors occur and what would be needed to fix them. Or would be if IBM could be bothered, which they have made clear they won't be.burnstripe wrote: ↑Sat Jul 17, 2021 7:53 amThis isn't due to a mix match of bit versions is it? My guess would be you have a 32 bit version of excel and it's opening a 64 bit version of the application. If excel is 32 bit make sure the tm1p.xla the perspectives shortcut points to is in the bin folder, not the bin64 folder.Wim Gielis wrote: ↑Fri Jul 16, 2021 8:38 pm
You start TM1 Perspectives from the Windows Start menu. Excel opens fine with some other addins (of mine, and Jedox, a.o.). No workbook is active/opened. You use TM1 > Explorer to log on in Perspectives. You open a view on a random cube and ask for an Active form to Excel. Nothing out of the ordinary I would say.
Code: Select all
ExecuteProcess( 'TECH_restrict cube selections' );
, 'pCube', 'CUBE NAME'
, 'pView', 'VIEW NAME' );
Assuming that IBM is true to their word and aren't touching Perspectives / Architect, I can understand how a change in the server can cause the second of those. Given the number of bug fixes that have involved TI code over the whole of the PA2 family of releases, the server may now simply be rejecting faulty code as a safeguard which is why it ends up vanishing. But yes, I agree that it's rather harsh. Baby with the bathwater and all that.Wim Gielis wrote: ↑Sat Jul 17, 2021 11:49 am A defect was logged with IBM for this one, as well as for another more important problem in Architect 2.0.9.9.
I have an existing TI process that opens fine in PAL 2.0.8.
There is code like this:
I know that this is against the rules. But if you are then observing 2 things:Code: Select all
ExecuteProcess( 'TECH_restrict cube selections' ); , 'pCube', 'CUBE NAME' , 'pView', 'VIEW NAME' );
- either TM1 Architect crashes completely (not the server)
- either the process opens without any error message but the said Prolog tab is completely empty (!)
Pretty harsh I think, as a reaction to my typo. Turbo Integrator in 2.0.8 was more benevolent and compassionate.
Although I sometimes live life on the edge in the way a lot of old school admins do, I have to admit that I don't think I've ever done that. Not in production, anyway. In the pre-Arc days I used to edit in Notepad++, but I'd always copy the code to a dev server and made sure that it compiled before copying and pasting to production. Of course the down side of that is that this only allows you to edit code, not variables, parameters or default data sources the way you could if you directly edit the text file as mentioned above.Wim Gielis wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 12:17 am Should it not be changed by IBM, then I can see a number of consequences:
- editing a PRO file directly in a text editor and rebooting TM1 becomes a very risky undertaking
Or the third one, more people will buy Arc and see their blood pressure drop by 30 basis points. (Yes, I know that I keep banging on about Arc but it is just SO. GOOD.)Wim Gielis wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 12:17 am - when upgrading to those newer versions and using Architect, one should be absolutely sure that all processes are correct with respect to syntax.
Two very important messages if you ask me.
(NB: This is about PowerShell Core, not classic PowerShell .Net which is of course blue.)Some guy on the Interwebz wrote:There are no words to describe how much I hate what Microsoft did here. I am working on a VM, it is past midnight and the standard color scheme is very difficult to read. For some ridiculous trendy reason, the background on PowerShell is black.
A bit like a company that expects you to go faffing around in command lines and manually editing text files in 2021, but let's not name names. The funny part was this reply, though it wasn't intended to be:Some guy on the Interwebz wrote: I went in and changed the text to black and the background to white. i did this in Default and Properties. Well, because of the syntax highlighting, my color changes did not do what I think any reasonable person would expect. The background did become white, but the text was yellow and it was even harder to read.
I found you very informative article and surprise, surprise, Microsoft provides a great deal of customizability, but not through their GUI. It is very hard to type the commands when I can't read what I am typing.
{Sucks air through teeth...} Yeah, that sounds oddly familiar...Some OTHER guy on the Interwebz wrote: In the upcoming new world, it will be less relevant whether people hate a vendor for such things, because they typically don't care --
BWAAAAH-HA-HA-HA!!!! You're talking cr@p kid; that world will never exist. But {insert dream sequence optical effect here} imagine if it did. I'd never have to work a day again in my life, all on IBM's dime... You'll all be invited (not all at once, of course) to my 40 bedroom palazzo in the countryside of Lazio, with my 40 acres of olive trees, 4 Olympic sized swimming pools and {calculates the amount that IBM owes me...} personal health spa with 20 massage therapists and 10 spa baths.Some OTHER guy on the Interwebz wrote: instead, they will be financially liable for the wasted time users encounter when standard instructions no longer work.
I always get tripped up by the fact that the last line of the section records the number of lines in it, i.e.Alan Kirk wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 1:32 amAlthough I sometimes live life on the edge in the way a lot of old school admins do, I have to admit that I don't think I've ever done that. Not in production, anyway. In the pre-Arc days I used to edit in Notepad++, but I'd always copy the code to a dev server and made sure that it compiled before copying and pasting to production. Of course the down side of that is that this only allows you to edit code, not variables, parameters or default data sources the way you could if you directly edit the text file as mentioned above.Wim Gielis wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 12:17 am Should it not be changed by IBM, then I can see a number of consequences:
- editing a PRO file directly in a text editor and rebooting TM1 becomes a very risky undertaking
Code: Select all
575,84
I edit PRO files everyday. Heck, I even wrote an AutoHotKey script to update the counters for meykud wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 1:13 am I always get tripped up by the fact that the last line of the section records the number of lines in it, i.e.means that there are 84 lines in Data.Code: Select all
575,84
So when I add a line in Notepad++, I need to update that counter, otherwise TM1 just silently ignores it![]()
First line not last line. 575 is the start of the Epilog...ykud wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 1:13 am I always get tripped up by the fact that the last line of the section records the number of lines in it, i.e.means that there are 84 lines in Data.Code: Select all
575,84
Shows then I last edited it directlyAndy Key wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 2:20 amFirst line not last line. 575 is the start of the Epilog...ykud wrote: ↑Mon Jul 19, 2021 1:13 am I always get tripped up by the fact that the last line of the section records the number of lines in it, i.e.means that there are 84 lines in Data.Code: Select all
575,84
![]()
After a careful inspection by an IBM engineer, S. Seigneurie, it appears that there were 25 variables in the file.Wim Gielis wrote: ↑Sun Jul 18, 2021 12:17 am Should it not be changed by IBM, then I can see a number of consequences:
- editing a PRO file directly in a text editor and rebooting TM1 becomes a very risky undertaking
- when upgrading to those newer versions and using Architect, one should be absolutely sure that all processes are correct with respect to syntax.
Two very important messages if you ask me.