Bonjour Stéphane
>I totally am confused with this comment.
You should not. I am sorry if i disturbed you.
I just try to argue that VFP is not really a software to
develop software packages, more applications than packages.
It is fine to prototype a package (talking heavy ones)
but it competes with pb more than with delphi,
with vb more than with c/c++.
As you have possibly done yourself, i have used
quite a number of programming alternatives.
In the past dbase, fox (i was using the fox beta...
back in the mid-80s),C and smalltalk and some
exotic stuff as well (for fun only).
Yes fox and vfp were the most useful of all!
VFP string management is still impressive in
to-days standards. Yes it is a great tool.
Possibly because we handle a complex code (though not very big),
we now miss the sophisticated data structures that you find in
typical "programming languages".
I understand your point that most vfp programmers and possibly
most UT members do not need those data structures in their job
(examples: lists, dictionnaries and combinations of them array of them
list of dictionnaries, dictionnaries of objects...).
I expect you can emulate most of those data structure
with cursors, arrays and objects.
We just need them now as as well as we miss the kind of speed u
can get from delphi thru optimized middleware
(yes there are bunch of solutions faster than ado) and compiler
(minor improvement of course).
I accept that it's gonna be hell to program but C++ is worse.
A plus
François
Précédent
Répondre
Voir le fil de ce thread
Voir le fil de ce thread à partir de ce message seulement
Voir tous les messages de ce thread
Voir tous les messages de ce thread à partir de ce message seulement