Bonnie
http://www.dataplus-svc.com
--
Message posted via http://www.accessmonster.com
Two possible issues:
first, is your fieldname Date? If so, you're getting Access confused about
whether you mean the fieldname or the builtin Date() function. Avoid using
reserved words like this as the names of fields or controls.
Second, if that's not it, you may have a bad reference. Date() seems to be
especially vulnerable to this. To see, open any module in design view, or open
the VBA editor by typing Ctrl-G. Select Tools... References from the menu. One
of the .DLL files required by Access will probably be marked MISSING. Uncheck
it, recheck it, close and open Access.
If none are MISSING, check any reference; close and open Access; then uncheck
it again. This will force Access to relink the libraries.
--
John W. Vinson [MVP]
>The correct usage in Access is Now().
Well... not really. There is a Now() function which returns the current date
and time accurate to the second; there is *also* a Date() function which
returns the current date without a time portion (equivalent to midnight at the
start of today's date). Both functions have their uses, just depending on
whether you want the time included or not.
You're quite right about not using Date as a fieldname, though.
John W. Vinson wrote:
>>The correct usage in Access is Now().
>
>Well... not really. There is a Now() function which returns the current date
>and time accurate to the second; there is *also* a Date() function which
>returns the current date without a time portion (equivalent to midnight at the
>start of today's date). Both functions have their uses, just depending on
>whether you want the time included or not.
>
>You're quite right about not using Date as a fieldname, though.
--
tools, references, shows "admin 1.0 type library" was missing. Unchecked,
then re-checked, closed access, re-added the date(), still same error
message. Then re-opened access, unchecked the "admin 1.0 type library" check
box, saved, then exited. Re-added the date(), now no error messages are
present. Appears to work without this "admin 1.0 type library"...
"John W. Vinson" wrote:
> .
>