Solved: Re: Execution finished by For Statement - Qlik Community

agustinbobba · ‎2016-04-25

Hi,

In my script I use an iteration statement for several loads, then I load other tables; something like this:

LET v.Product = NoOfRows('$(v.ProductTable)');

FOR i=0 to $(v.Product)-1
     Load *
     Resident AA;
Next;

ProductDetail:
Load *
Resident [Product Detail];

I execute the Script without Errors, but then realized that the execution of the script was not complete.

Then I saw on the log and I found that the variable v.Product was equals to -1, so never load the table ProductDetail; this table is out of the for statement.

My log:

25-Apr-16 11:46:47: 5437 FOR i=0 to -1

25-Apr-16 11:46:48: Execution finished.

This is a bug?, when the for is from 0 to -1 the scipt stop without error message.

Thank!

Agustín

[Ediit] FOR i=0 to $(v.Product)-1

agustinbobba · ‎2016-04-25

I am trying to reproduce the same scenery in a example but I can't.

But I found the problem but like you said QV start to beheva weird, the thing is that below the for i have a drop table to the table Product.

FOR i=0 to $(v.Product)-1  

  TRACE For statement;
   
    LET v.Table = DATE(Today(),'YYYYMMDD');

  NOCONCATENATE
  [$(v.Table)]:
     Load *  
     Resident AA;  
Next;  

DROP TABLE $(v.ProductTable);

If the v.productTable doesn't exist, the 'drop table' shows error message. But in my code only end the execution. In the example actually shows a error message.

4/25/2016 3:50:36 PM: 0034 LET v.Product = NoOfRows('Product')

4/25/2016 3:50:36 PM: 0036 FOR i=0 to -1

4/25/2016 3:50:36 PM: 0048 DROP TABLE Product

4/25/2016 3:50:36 PM: Execution finished.

If my code I put a trace statement before and after the drop table QV says doesn't exist the table and shows a error message.

Yes, this is weird..

Well!, thank all for your comments

Agustin.

View solution in original post

sinanozdemir · ‎2016-04-25

Did you mean to put $(v.Product) - 1 instead of $(v.ProductTable) - 1?

Try with $(v.Product) since that's the variable storing the number of rows.

Thanks

trdandamudi · ‎2016-04-25

I think it should be:

FOR i=0 to $(v.Product) - 1

agustinbobba · ‎2016-04-25

Sorry my example was wrong, yes the FOR statement is like you said: FOR i=0 to $(v.Product)-1

sinanozdemir · ‎2016-04-25

Then either something is wrong with v.ProductTable variable. Take a look at if this variable is empty.

agustinbobba · ‎2016-04-25

Yes indeed, the problem is when this variable is equal to 0, so the FOR fail.

agustinbobba · ‎2016-04-25

Yes, I found the problem, but I don't understand why qlikview cut the execution of the script when the FOR go to 0 to -1, and not shows an error message, only cut the execution.

luis_pimentel · ‎2016-04-25

Hi Agustín,

The Qlik script is having the proper behaviour. A loop from 0 to -1 should not fail, since there is no error at all. Just the condition is not met, so the script keeps executing.

I suggest you to control the value of v.Product beforre the FOR sentence, and skip it (or do what you want) in case v.Product = 0.

Regards,

Luis.

agustinbobba · ‎2016-04-25

Yes, I understand that the condition is not met; but is not have the proper behavior, because, below the FOR statement I have other tables to load but qlikview stopped the execution right after the FOR.

Peter_Cammaert · ‎2016-04-25

Two remarks (each probably worth 1ct so it all sums up to "my 2cts")

The table for which you try to find the number of rows doesn't exist. NoOfRows returns NULL, not 0 because that's a value that indicates an empty but existing table. The FOR loop still has a valid syntax because the $-sign expansion for $(v.Product) will produce nothing and only the -1 part will remain.
FOR i = 0 TO -1 should never produce an error because it isn't an invalid specificaiton. If you consult the QV Desktop help on FOR NEXT, you will discover that the full syntax is: FOR var = expr1 TO expr2 [STEP expr3] meaning that negative step values are allowed and therefore expr2 can be negative as well. The default step value of course is +1, but that doesn't affect the validity of the FOR specification or its workings. The one you have on your hands will just never execute a single cycle.

Best,

Peter