Subscribe Bookmark RSS Feed

Variables not resolving to their values when passed into the table column formula

reynon74

Community Trekker

Joined:

Jun 23, 2011

Hi,

I have recently upgraded to JMP v9 for v8, and my script does not seem work as per v8.

First part of  this script opens a "Data" file (*.csv) into a table and adds headers ect, the second part opens another "Limit" file (*.JSL) which contains a value lookup table "variable1 = 0.0333"; variable = 0.0222; ect... ".  When reading passing this values to the table, the table is picking up the variable names as literals as opposed to resolving to the underlying numeric values.

The only thing that has changed is the Jmp application version from 8 to 9.

Hovering over the variables in the first script shows that the values are being read correctly from the source Limit file (*.JSL).

It seems the variables in the first script are local only and not global for the Table - Column - Formula to use?

Any ideas?

Thank you

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

Accepted Solutions
pmroz

Super User

Joined:

Jun 23, 2011

Solution

When referring to global variables in a column formula, you need to preface them with "::".

So change this:

     :first_column + :second_column / variable1

to this:

     :first_column + :second_column / ::variable1

3 REPLIES
pmroz

Super User

Joined:

Jun 23, 2011

Solution

When referring to global variables in a column formula, you need to preface them with "::".

So change this:

     :first_column + :second_column / variable1

to this:

     :first_column + :second_column / ::variable1

reynon74

Community Trekker

Joined:

Jun 23, 2011

Thank you PMroz for your quick response. 

Your solution worked. 

I'm not sure why the script work in v8 without "::" before the variable?

Thanks again

MTOF

Community Trekker

Joined:

Jun 29, 2011

Using :: for global variables was also recommended for JMP 8, but not enforced (i.e. it generally worked anyway unless the global variable had a name that could be confused with a column name or an inbuilt function). But in JMP 9 it is more strictly enforced - thus the difference between JMP 8 and JMP 9.

BR, Marianne