Terry,

<g>

I think folks see the wisdom of your position. Perhaps common sense is becoming more common. <g>

The whole move to stateless programming is something I find facinating - having come from a FoxBase 1.0/dBASE II on CP/M background. I think perhaps that those of us who've had to write contention resolution logic on the old networks will 'take' to stateless a little more easily than those who've been used to VFP doing automatic record locks. A lot of the logic is the same...



>Well the hammer aint hit hard so far! It sounds like VMF is a good product. And, I'm certainly glad they support our community. I am glad that I have moved beyong needing an "Edit" / "Add" (stateless?) buttons on my project forms, so - I get a little cocky sometimes:-).
>
>>Terry,
>>
>>If I correctly understand you I couldn't agree more. I think that the framework should follow the needs of the application (is this close?). That is, do not try and force the application into the framework. Rather, learn the general approaches of the various frameworks and use the appropriate framework.
>>
>>Personally, that's why I ended up with Visual MaxFrame. Every single framework I've looked at has been technically far superior to hand-rolled stuff, if only that they enforce a certain discipline upon the developer(s). VMP, of all the frameworks, excels in that it stays the heck out of my way unless I need it.
>>
>>I'm sure that others think the same about their choices and I have no argument whatsoever with them as I figure their needs are different from mine and their choices best meet their needs.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>>>>I use CodeBook, Visual Fox Express, and Visual MaxFrame Professional. These are all good frameworks and there are many more. Your task is to find the one that is most suitable for your companies requirements and the way you like to work.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>What? Do you mean using 3 different framework in developing single app? If so, how do you integrate them?
>>>>>
>>>>>Or - more to the point - with all the on-board VFP feature, as well as design and implementation strategies, it would seem there is little enough time just to keep up with VFP, much less a commercial framework , and much (more) less the frameworks. Just hope that it won't be too complicated to maintain.
>>>>>T
>>>>
>>>>Terry;
>>>>
>>>>Actually, using a commercial framework can make using Visual FoxPro easier! As we all know learning how to use Visual FoxPro is a daunting task and takes a good deal of time to become proficient. By using a commercial framework you learn how to be productive faster. Frameworks are implemented to be successful. They carry out the majority of necessary steps to create an application. I am making the assumption that the developer has experience in developing data driven applications. They are not for the novice!
>>>>
>>>>To learn VFP well enough to create your own application framework and applications takes a great deal of time.
>>>>
>>>>Tom
>>>
>>>A couple of years back I got hammered on this board for asking the question "Why to all VFP apps developed in a commercial framework look the same?". I guess the question is what and who you are programming for. If its an in house project, or you've got a captured user base, then what the heck, they have to use what you give them. If the app was in Quick Basic - they would have little choice except to use it (they're captured).
>>>
>>>But the deeper question is: Is a project suitable for a frame work? Are the user's captured - or do you have to compete with other applications for the seat. Do I want to spend a career learning how to work within the limits of a frame work pardigm, or do I want the broadest access to the VFP paradigm, so I can compete. Maybe to me it's important that my projects have more sex appeal than my competitor's. Maybe I am just lucky I had the time slug through how to design a project and learn the rudiments of VFP (though I still have a ton to go!).
>>>
>>>But even now, I bet I could walk through a hall full of VFP demos, and just by looking at the interface, tell you what brand of frame work was being used. I bet you could too.
>>>
>>>The questions I like are: Did you write that in C?
>>>
>>>Should we be writing apps to work with a framework (or cause its a job), or - are we writing apps to make push the state of design (dare I say, take over the world:-)?
>>>
>>>Now, I'll get hammered again - I know it. But for simple bench projects, where you don't have to compete for market shares based on ease of use simplicity, a commercial frame work is great. But - if you have the time - learning how to design and structure a system (is that flowcharting or understanding rudimentary business rules?), and also learning how to implement the plan in VFP, will go a long way to learning how to build powerful, zero redundancy yet simple competetive software.
>>>
>>>But what do I know? RANT OFF
>>>Terry