![]() | |
#1
| |||
| |||
|
#2
| |||
| |||
|
|
I am currently reading "Build Your Own Framework with Visual FoxPro" by Kenneth Chazotte and published by Hentzenwerke Publishing. |
#3
| |||
| |||
|
|
Gene Wirchenko <genew (AT) mail (DOT) ocis.net> wrote: I am currently reading "Build Your Own Framework with Visual FoxPro" by Kenneth Chazotte and published by Hentzenwerke Publishing. At the risk of spawning a debate on the merits (or otherwise) of frameworks, the problem with most of the reading matter on this subject is that the authors go hog-wild with their own way of doing things. Here's my 2 cents. Frameworks are for dummies! A tad harsh? Well how about this ... Frameworks are for lazy dummies!! Frameworks are for people who like the "one size fits all" principle. It's RAD at the expense of ... er ... customer requirements and creativity. |
|
Wait a minute! As a close observer of the NG and someone who has an elephantine memory for trivia, didn't you say "bye-bye" to FoxPro a while back because you were moving to WinDev? |
|
Instead, spend time creating your specialised subclasses as and when they're required for your current project. |
#4
| |||
| |||
|
|
"Roger Ansell" <notmyreal (AT) emailaddress (DOT) com> wrote: Gene Wirchenko <genew (AT) mail (DOT) ocis.net> wrote: I am currently reading "Build Your Own Framework with Visual FoxPro" by Kenneth Chazotte and published by Hentzenwerke Publishing. At the risk of spawning a debate on the merits (or otherwise) of frameworks, the problem with most of the reading matter on this subject is that the authors go hog-wild with their own way of doing things. Here's my 2 cents. Frameworks are for dummies! A tad harsh? Well how about this ... Frameworks are for lazy dummies!! Frameworks are for people who like the "one size fits all" principle. It's RAD at the expense of ... er ... customer requirements and creativity. A well-designed, appropriately-used framework can save considerable effort reinventing the wheel. Wait a minute! As a close observer of the NG and someone who has an elephantine memory for trivia, didn't you say "bye-bye" to FoxPro a while back because you were moving to WinDev? Not me. (Sorry, but the elephant seems to have sat on you. What *is* WinDev?) [snip] Instead, spend time creating your specialised subclasses as and when they're required for your current project. That is a lot of the work of a framwork. Sincerely, Gene Wirchenko Computerese Irregular Verb Conjugation: I have preferences. You have biases. He/She has prejudices. |
#5
| |||
| |||
|
|
"Roger Ansell" <notmyreal (AT) emailaddress (DOT) com> wrote: Gene Wirchenko <genew (AT) mail (DOT) ocis.net> wrote: I am currently reading "Build Your Own Framework with Visual FoxPro" by Kenneth Chazotte and published by Hentzenwerke Publishing. At the risk of spawning a debate on the merits (or otherwise) of frameworks, the problem with most of the reading matter on this subject is that the authors go hog-wild with their own way of doing things. Here's my 2 cents. Frameworks are for dummies! A tad harsh? Well how about this ... Frameworks are for lazy dummies!! Frameworks are for people who like the "one size fits all" principle. It's RAD at the expense of ... er ... customer requirements and creativity. A well-designed, appropriately-used framework can save considerable effort reinventing the wheel. Wait a minute! As a close observer of the NG and someone who has an elephantine memory for trivia, didn't you say "bye-bye" to FoxPro a while back because you were moving to WinDev? Not me. (Sorry, but the elephant seems to have sat on you. What *is* WinDev?) [snip] Instead, spend time creating your specialised subclasses as and when they're required for your current project. That is a lot of the work of a framwork. Sincerely, Gene Wirchenko Computerese Irregular Verb Conjugation: I have preferences. You have biases. He/She has prejudices. |
#6
| |||
| |||
|
|
A bit of subject but I agree with you on frameworks Gene. I decided to use the Promatrix framework vpm 4 years ago and have not regretted the decision. It does all the spadework, throws in hundreds of useful features automatically like security, menu permissions etc etc and yet leaves you the freedom to develop as you want. Link it up with xCase and xCase2vpm and the time saved is immeasurable. I remember when FPW2.6 came out a similar discussion took place - real programmers would program the spr files direct - dummies like me would use the infinitely faster and simpler screen designers. Sincerely Stephen "Gene Wirchenko" <genew (AT) mail (DOT) ocis.net> wrote in message news:ec4ml01eh2hj2euke4anq9djpad79ic0o0 (AT) 4ax (DOT) com... "Roger Ansell" <notmyreal (AT) emailaddress (DOT) com> wrote: Gene Wirchenko <genew (AT) mail (DOT) ocis.net> wrote: I am currently reading "Build Your Own Framework with Visual FoxPro" by Kenneth Chazotte and published by Hentzenwerke Publishing. At the risk of spawning a debate on the merits (or otherwise) of frameworks, the problem with most of the reading matter on this subject is that the authors go hog-wild with their own way of doing things. Here's my 2 cents. Frameworks are for dummies! A tad harsh? Well how about this ... Frameworks are for lazy dummies!! Frameworks are for people who like the "one size fits all" principle. It's RAD at the expense of ... er ... customer requirements and creativity. A well-designed, appropriately-used framework can save considerable effort reinventing the wheel. Wait a minute! As a close observer of the NG and someone who has an elephantine memory for trivia, didn't you say "bye-bye" to FoxPro a while back because you were moving to WinDev? Not me. (Sorry, but the elephant seems to have sat on you. What *is* WinDev?) [snip] Instead, spend time creating your specialised subclasses as and when they're required for your current project. That is a lot of the work of a framwork. Sincerely, Gene Wirchenko Computerese Irregular Verb Conjugation: I have preferences. You have biases. He/She has prejudices. |
#7
| |||
| |||
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |