Logic is not wokring

Question

Logic is not wokring

Viewing 3 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply

Jeff Moden SSC Guru Points: 1004664 More actions · Answer 1

It's been a while since I've messed with negative boolean algebra so I hope I got this right...

The first one equates to NOT (invoice_cl = 'INN1' OR PaymentStatus = 'Unpaid'). That means that anything with an 'IIN1' will be excluded and anything with an 'Unpaid' in the rows will be excluded whether or not it's an 'IIN1' row or not.

The second one states that both 'INN1' AND 'UnPaid' must be in the same row and, if they are, only then exclude it.

--Jeff Moden

RBAR is pronounced "ree-bar" and is a "Modenism" for Row-By-Agonizing-Row.
First step towards the paradigm shift of writing Set Based code:
________Stop thinking about what you want to do to a ROW... think, instead, of what you want to do to a COLUMN.

Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.

Helpful Links:
How to post code problems
How to Post Performance Problems
Create a Tally Function (fnTally)

Jonathan AC Roberts SSCoach Points: 18407 More actions · Answer 2

not (invoice_cl in('INN1') and [Payment Status] = 'Unpaid')
= (invoice_cl not in('INN1') or [Payment Status] <> 'Unpaid')
= (invoice_cl <> 'INN1' or [Payment Status] <> 'Unpaid')

so the statement

[Invoice Class] IN (@invoice) and not (invoice_cl in('INN1') and [Payment Status] = 'Unpaid')

is equivalent to

[Invoice Class] IN (@invoice) and (invoice_cl <> 'INN1' or [Payment Status] <> 'Unpaid')

So in your first statement you have an AND where you should have an OR

ajoe SSC Veteran Points: 269 More actions · Answer 3

Thank you Jonathan AC Roberts and Jeff Moden for replying back to me. your explanations were really helpful.:)

This reply was modified 4 years, 8 months ago by ajoe.