DWUTKA at marlow.com
DWUTKA at marlow.com
Wed Mar 17 13:47:48 CST 2004
Just recovered for a very NASTY crash of my RAID 5 data drive. I have toyed around with a code library of sorts before, but this recent headache is giving a serious push into digging into that project again. Anyone interested in helping out/beta testing? Drew -----Original Message----- From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com]On Behalf Of William Hindman Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 7:32 AM To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving Subject: Re: [AccessD] Re: [Private] Framework Discussion - Dependent Obje cts "some very general and well proven functions which I simply keep collected in some modules which I copy-paste into a new project as needed - not very fancy, I know, but it works." gustav ...me too :) ...I tried JC's framework a couple years ago and, for me, found myself putting as much or more effort into it as I was client apps ...but otoh banging around in his framework taught me "with events" coding and many other techniques that I can't imagine not using in every app today ...I'm clearly not nearly as disciplined about coding as JC, Jurgen, Shamil and some other gurus here are so I just make do with a template mdb much as you describe. :) William Hindman You know the world is upside down when Bill Clinton wins a Grammy and Janet Jackson is the subject of a government sex investigation. Argus Hamilton. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gustav Brock" <gustav at cactus.dk> To: "Access Developers discussion and problem solving" <accessd at databaseadvisors.com> Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 4:14 AM Subject: Re: [AccessD] Re: [Private] Framework Discussion - Dependent Obje cts > Hi Drew > > Yes, that makes sense to me, though I don't have any tools to program > dlls. I have some very general and well proven functions which I > simply keep collected in some modules which I copy-paste into a new > project as needed - not very fancy, I know, but it works. > > /gustav > > > I'm in the same situation as you. I find that building a 'framework' isn't > > worth the effort, because I have to develop very diverse GUI's. It's not a > > matter of re-using features, it's a matter of building specific features to > > handle the task at hand. > > > At my full time job, however, I have found that one of the best practices I > > can stick too, is to develop applications as 'stand-alone' objects, yet > > leave room for interaction. So if I develop a library application for our > > Drafting department, and later I develop a modeling package for the > > engineers, if I need access to the drafting library, I can just 'reference' > > the drafting department's .dll's. Makes life a lot easier. To me, that's > > what I call a framework. It's not a generic thing from a functionality > > standpoint, but more of a generic thing from a usability standpoint. > > > Make sense? > > -- > _______________________________________________ > AccessD mailing list > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com > -- _______________________________________________ AccessD mailing list AccessD at databaseadvisors.com http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com