DWUTKA at marlow.com
DWUTKA at marlow.com
Tue Mar 16 14:09:50 CST 2004
'The days of Drew and JC'? LOL 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? Drew -----Original Message----- From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com]On Behalf Of Gustav Brock Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2004 9:00 AM To: Jim Dettman Cc: Access Developers discussion and problem solving Subject: [AccessD] Re: [Private] Framework Discussion - Dependent Objects Hi Jim Ha ha, hit by the Colby flames! Welcome to the club! I read it too and wondered - but I guess that's the way he is and that it doesn't mean so much. Remember the days of Drew and JC? Eventually they cooled down. And internationalization? He just loves his framework as a child, so I've chosen to keep my mouth shut. Also, and seriously, I find my forms so diverse and often highly specialized as I can't see a framework fit in and certainly not worth spending the time to build it. If inheritance was possible, I might reconsider, but I guess that won't ever happen. /gustav > I'm not telling you do to anything. I was trying to add to the > discussion, pointing out that performance is based on design decisions that > are made in the framework. You are taking an OOP approach and the same > fundamentals apply no matter which language your dealing with. > I don't understand why your taking this so personally. I never said that > what you were doing was not worth it. I was discussing frameworks in > general. This has nothing to do with me leaving Access for VFP, which I > have not (I still use both tools on a regular basis). I would love to see > someone do a commercial framework for Access. But after 10 years of > existence, one has to ask themselves why there are not a truck load of them > already. > You asked for input about the design of frameworks and I've brought up a > few issues (performance and distribution of new versions). If you don't > want to address them and explore these areas then fine. But if that's the > case, then don't ask for the input in the first place. -- _______________________________________________ AccessD mailing list AccessD at databaseadvisors.com http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com