Marc,

First, it's not polite to post to so many newsgroups. Keep your posts to
relevant groups only.
Second, no it cannot be done.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Please post/reply to the newsgroup(s) so
that everyone can benefit from the discussion.

Regards,

Klaus H. Probst, MCP

       ICQ: 22454937
      The VB Box: http://www.*-*-*.com/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

An off-the-wall thought....  could a collection be used to get the
functionality:

Dim mcStuff As Collection

Set mcStuff=New Collection

mcStuff.Add thevalue,rs!Name & "k"
(I append the k to ensure that the key value is not numeric)

You can't change values so to update the value of a variable you'd have to
remove & re-add the item in the collection but it might work.  You could
keep another collection of the field names if you need to be able to
retrieve them as well.

Bob,

Well, yes, that's possible. But that's another thing entirely, because
you're storing values, not declaring variables.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Please post/reply to the newsgroup(s) so
that everyone can benefit from the discussion.

Regards,

Klaus H. Probst, MCP

       ICQ: 22454937
      The VB Box: http://members.xoom.com/kprobst/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Klaus...

Not to be argumentative, but in the most technical sense it is declaring a
variable. A variable is simply a named location in memory that stores a
value, which is exactly what Bob was doing with his collection example.

--
Ben Baird, MVP
Visual Basic Thunder
http://www.vbthunder.com
Common Controls Replacement Project, Official Member
http://www.mvps.org/ccrp/
Please direct your programming questions to the newsgroups.

Hi Ben,

You're being argumentative ;-)

Actually, no, I don't agree with you there. In the case of a collection
what you're doing is allocating memory to hold a variable in an indexed
sequence of memory addresses, placing the variable there, and then using a
key (or index) to gain access to that address.

OTOH, declaring a variable means allocating memory for a given type and
assigning a "selector" (not the best definition, but you get the idea) to
it, which is the symbolic name. The original post wanted to create and
assign the symbolic name out of the value of a database field (i.e., out
of thin air), which is dumb in any case. Hell, you can't even do that in
assembler.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Best regards,

Klaus H. Probst, MCP

       ICQ: 22454937
      The VB Box: http://members.xoom.com/kprobst/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I argree with Klaus to the effect that placing a value in a collection
would not be considered dimensioning the 'key', although, the collection
may be re-dimensioning itself.  The solution Bob gave, appears to be what
the poster was looking for, he may have used Dim for lack of a better
term.

I would define dimensioning more like the method that assigns (RAM) memory
to a named variable, based on its specific data type.  

The collection does not allow full access, and the memory used is not
dependant on any named data type.

You don't dimension a constant, for example, yet it would fit your
description....

LFS

Klaus...

I noticed that while you disagree, at the same time you yourself call it a
variable. So I ask you:

-- Was the memory allocated before the new item was added, or was it
allocated to make room for it?

-- Does the fact that the value is contained in an "indexed sequence" of
addresses make it any less a variable? If so, then what do you call an
array?

Any variables you declare within your own code are accessed through keys and
indexes.

The "Dim" keyword stands for "Dimension", which essentially means making
room in memory for a new value. When you add an item to a collection, the
collection must be re-*dimensioned* to hold it. The fact that you access it
via a string has nothing to do with whether it is a variable or not. As far
as VB is concerned, your "selector" or "symbolic name" is a string (or
"key") in the code window, and an index once compiled.

Don't think that just because the Dim keyword wasn't used, the value cannot
be a variable.
--
Ben Baird, MVP
Visual Basic Thunder
http://www.vbthunder.com
Common Controls Replacement Project, Official Member
http://www.mvps.org/ccrp/
Please direct your programming questions to the newsgroups.

I have to smile, nit picking over words....

2 points:

The new value is accessed through the collection, it is the
collection's Count property that increases.  How is that
re-dimensioning being attributed to the 'Key'?

The definition of a variable precludes your assertion:

(Glossary quote for 'Variable')
"A named storage location that can contain data that can be modified
during program execution."

Values in a Collection cannot be modified, only added or removed,
full access is not allowed.

Another tip off comes from the Help file on Dim:

[Dim] "Declares variables and allocates storage space."
...
"Use the Dim statement at module or procedure level to declare the
data type of a variable."

The purpose of Dim is to declare a data type, and give it a name.  In the
case of a collection, a member is added, and given an index.  So...

Dim a variable from a string?  Nope. (Not with standard VB commands)
Create and Use a variable from a string?  Yes. (Declare it in a Collection)

LFS

Larry...

I thought it was pretty funny myself, but hey... :-)

As well as the collection's size.

I believe all I said is that the new item is accessed through the Key. If
not, well, that's all I meant.

I would challenge the definition given, but I don't wish to prolong the
discussion more than need be. As the saying goes, "You're entitled to your
opinion -- even if it is wrong." <g>

The member has data type as well -- however, much like VBScript, you have no
control over what that type is. As for the index... variables declared with
Dim also have an index, more commonly called a memory address.

I'll agree with that much, anyway :-)

--
Ben Baird, MVP
Visual Basic Thunder
http://www.vbthunder.com
Common Controls Replacement Project, Official Member
http://www.mvps.org/ccrp/
Please direct your programming questions to the newsgroups.

Ben,

A variable in the sense that it's a memory address with  a modifiable
value. But I cannot bring myself to think of collection or array indices
as "variables" in the "Dim X As Y" type of memory allocation through a
compiler-recognized symbolic name.

The array grew dynamically by so many bytes to hold an indexed pointer to
a new address with a new value. *Where* the address is need not concern us
-- just the fact that I can access it through an index or a key. I
consider an array index to be part of the variable that the array actually
is. So, again, I can't call it a variable all by itself.

Again, the variable is the array. Individual items inside the array are
not, IMO, variables. Well, they are, but not in the strict sense of the
word.

No, that's the difference. An array index does not have a symbolic name.
Just an index *into* a symbolic name, because the container --if you
will-- is the array, which does have a symbolic name.

it

*Dimension* is the act of allocating space either on the stack or on the
heap, *before* the program or the procedure is actually executed. Adding a
new item to an array just grows the memory address to hold the new
item(s). Granted, in terms of memory allocation it is theoretically the
same thing, but the difference --and I think we've gotten away from the
purpose of the original post-- is that you cannot "create" a symbolic name
from another one, or from the value of another variable or whatever. I
don't think that's a limitation of any language. It's just how computer
languages work. Thus Bob Butler's suggestion of using a collection creates
a viable alternative to the original impossible question.

Well, I guess I'm being argumentative Ben, but I see it differently from
you.

Uhmpf. Again, it is a variable in the sense that it's an indexed address
of memory whose value can be modified. But it does not have a symbolic
name. The array holds the symbolic name, and everything else goes through
that. "Redim" in VB is used to grow or shrink an existing array, not to
create new, independent variables with their own symbolic names.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Best regards,

Klaus H. Probst, MCP

       ICQ: 22454937
      The VB Box: http://members.xoom.com/kprobst/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Klaus ...

I guess it's pretty clear that we're not going to see eye to eye on this,
and it's getting a bit ridiculous... so I'll be bowing out of the discussion
at this point. We disagree, and we can leave it at that.

--
Ben Baird, MVP
Visual Basic Thunder
http://www.vbthunder.com
Common Controls Replacement Project, Official Member
http://www.mvps.org/ccrp/
Please direct your programming questions to the newsgroups.