[AccessD] Autonumber Assigned Immediately

DWUTKA at marlow.com DWUTKA at marlow.com
Fri Sep 9 12:18:52 CDT 2005


Welcome to the AccessD Debate team.  Rule #1: A debate must continue until a
search of the archives is required to find the original post that started
it.  Rule #2:  Drew is always right.  Rule #3:  JC is always right.  Rule
#4: Charlotte is always right.  Rule #5:  If rules 2,3, and 4 are in
conflict, refer to Rule #1.

<grin> (Hey, it is Friday!)

Drew

-----Original Message-----
From: Reuben Cummings [mailto:reuben at gfconsultants.com]
Sent: Friday, September 09, 2005 10:37 AM
To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving
Subject: Re: [AccessD] Autonumber Assigned Immediately


I'm here for ya, Drew.

I didn't intend to start a big discussion - I just thought it wasn't fair
for people to pick on...hell, I can't remember who even asked the original
question...

-----Original Message-----
From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com]On Behalf Of
DWUTKA at marlow.com
Sent: Friday, September 09, 2005 12:15 AM
To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com
Subject: Re: [AccessD] Autonumber Assigned Immediately


Woohoo, I have a sidekick finally!  Charlotte and JC have been tag teaming
me for YEARS! ;)

Drew

	-----Original Message-----
	From:	Reuben Cummings [SMTP:reuben at gfconsultants.com]
	Sent:	Thursday, September 08, 2005 7:44 PM
	To:	Access Developers discussion and problem solving
	Subject:	Re: [AccessD] Autonumber Assigned Immediately

	It can also be called over-building.

	I have an app that works perfectly and has done so since 2000.  I
wrote it
	with simplicity in mind.  I had it ready for use in 6 months with
very minor
	bugs.  I sold that app to an engineering firm that thought "building
it
	right, the first time" was the way to go and immediately set out to
	completely re-write the app.  The purchased the app in March of 2003
and in
	October of 2004 gave up with nothing that worked and gave the whole
thing
	back.  They thought they needed to build everything to "the right
way" -
	they were overbuilding the project.

	The question is "Who decides what the right way is?"  Is it mine
that works
	perfectly and is technically fine and has been making me good money
since
	2000...or the engineers that was written by the book, but never
worked and
	therefore never produced a penny?  BTW, I've seen the details of
their work
	records and they have over $300,000 invested in programming time.

	Getting stuff to the market is sometimes more important than
"perfect" code
	or design.  Ask Netscape how writing perfect code worked out for
them.

	I'm not a programmer - at least I don't consider myself one.  I have
never
	had any formal programming training and therefore have never been
caught up
	in books and such.  I simply build stuff that works.  If my clients
are
	happy and I'm making money I have to conclude the design is just
fine.

	Reuben Cummings
	GFC, LLC
	812.523.1017


	> -----Original Message-----
	> From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
	> [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com]On Behalf Of David
Mcafee
	> Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2005 5:18 PM
	> To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving
	> Subject: Re: [AccessD] Autonumber Assigned Immediately
	>
	>
	> So you don't have to go back there and fix things.
	>
	> It's called "building it right, the first time" :)
	>
	>
	> --- Susan Harkins <ssharkins at bellsouth.net> wrote:
	>
	> > My point would be -- if there are no rules, why
	> > bother until there are some?
	> > It might never happen.
	> >
	> > Susan H.
	> >
	> > Six months later you are told that all the numbers
	> > have to be padded to 6
	> > digits. Ok, either change the field to a text field
	> > (if it wasn't such
	> > already), revise the number generator accordingly,
	> > and run an update query
	> > on the existing records to include the padding, or
	> > find all uses of the
	> > 'number' field everywhere in the database and change
	> > the formatting of the
	> > number display. [I know which choice I would make :)
	> >
	> >
	> > Then a year down the line the suits say "You have to
	> > include an alpha prefix
	> > that shows which office created the record". Fine
	> > (As long as you can
	> > identify the office within the rest of the data).
	> > You change the 'number'
	> > generating code to tack on the prefix for new
	> > records and then run an update
	> > query to add the prefix to all the existing records.
	> >
	> >
	> > Sit back and wait for the next bright idea about
	> > what extra information can
	> > be stuffed into a 'serial number'. All of this is
	> > just a minor pain in the
	> > butt because of course you are not using this field
	> > as a Primary Key, that's
	> > handled by an autonumber that no one sees, so all
	> > your relationships are
	> > intact.
	> >
	> >
	> > --
	> > 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
	>




	--
	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




-- 
AccessD mailing list
AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com



More information about the AccessD mailing list