I am not sure what I did to start this happening, but the .Load of every form in lan mode gives an error function argument value, type, or count is invalid

cObjectName and cClassName seem to be OK…

Are you sure that, at that point, 'aw.vcx' $ Lower(set('classlib'))?

Could you expand the oException object?

aw.vcx is in the classlibs. Here is the expanded exception object:

Hi Tuvia,

the problem lies in this block of code:

modify class awColView of aw.vcx method wSave

for iProp = 1 to m.oThis.wnProp && CursorG|SetProp() -- see this.init()
	success = (.F.;
		or ICase(m.oThis.waProp[m.iProp, 3], !m.lRem, m.oThis.waProp[m.iProp, 4], !m.lADO, .F.);
		or AddProperty(;
			  m.oProp;
			, m.oThis.waProp[m.iProp, 1];
			, Iif(m.lCAD and m.oThis.waProp[m.iProp, 5]; && CAD.property overrides CursorGet|SetProp(property, <attached cursor>)
				, Evaluate('m.oCAD.' + m.oThis.waProp[m.iProp, 1]);
				, CursorGetProp(m.oThis.waProp[m.iProp, 1], m.cView);
				);
			);
		);
		and m.success
endfor

To further know what goes wong, maybe you can set a temporary try-catch as follows:

for iProp = 1 to m.oThis.wnProp && CursorG|SetProp() -- see this.init()
try && added for debug
	success = (.F.;
		or ICase(m.oThis.waProp[m.iProp, 3], !m.lRem, m.oThis.waProp[m.iProp, 4], !m.lADO, .F.);
		or AddProperty(;
			  m.oProp;
			, m.oThis.waProp[m.iProp, 1];
			, Iif(m.lCAD and m.oThis.waProp[m.iProp, 5]; && CAD.property overrides CursorGet|SetProp(property, <attached cursor>)
				, Evaluate('m.oCAD.' + m.oThis.waProp[m.iProp, 1]);
				, CursorGetProp(m.oThis.waProp[m.iProp, 1], m.cView);
				);
			);
		);
		and m.success
catch && added for debug
set step on && added for debug
endtry && added for debug
endfor

Thanks,

That allowed me to track the problem. The error was occuring every time a certain view was instantiated in the form.Load. I can use the view fine from VFP; so I am not sure what the problem was, but I removed the view from the dbc and recreated it, and the error vanished.

Thanks!

Do you mean that FoxInCloud could be more robust than VFP itself? 😉