1.9.8b10 adoption of record locks. Feedback

[jda]

>Hi Guys,
>
>In case somebody will adopt project for new syntax of SqlSelect() and get
>SUCCESS or FAILURE, please notify me.
>
>Especially in case of success :-)
>

I have made extensive changes in my RB project (probably 100 or more 
SQLSelects) and so far (now that new VCursor works) have mostly 
success. I'm running into some problems with the way some of my code 
behaves, but so far I've been able to restore normal behavior by 
playing with the ReadOnly/ReadWrite status. (This is a local, BTW, 
not VServer)

I'm still be bit unsure of what NoLocks is doing with ReadOnly and 
ReadWrite. If I set the cursor to ReadOnly, any other cursor that is 
ReadOnly can access the record, right? And if one cursor is 
ReadWrite, no other cursor can access those records until the cursor 
is nil'ed, right. So what does NoLocks do?

And if one record is in a ReadWrite cursor, and an attempt is made to 
create another cursor that contains 9 "free" records and that one 
"locked" record, what happens  -- are 9 records returned? Or is the 
new cursor empty (nil).

I'll have a fuller report after I get to play with this over the 
holiday weekend (4th of July here in the States).

Jon