> Jean Laeremans wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 8:31 PM, Bill Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> ...from a .NET MVP. Want to guess if it's a good or bad mention?
>>>
>> Surprised he even knew it existed...
>
Wow...what a tool.
"FoxPro" is like the "A" word ("Amway"). Say it and people start
running for the doors. Yeah, there's some terrible Foxpro projects out
there, but was it really the fault of Foxpro, or just that the
craftsmen/developer sucked? What's that TR says? "A poor craftsman
blames his tools." (or something like that).
If Foxpro is to be blamed, it's because they didn't make some things
hard and fast...kinda like a really powerful saw with no cutting guards
so the result was many folks with less digits. I saw that same
attribute as "flexibility" that allowed me to develop things much
quicker....I just had to be careful about how I designed things.
Some hardcore guys had problems with the threading et al, but in my
years, I've never had a problem with that. Sure, I'm not as old as some
of you guys (lol) so I guess I was lucky to come in at VFP5 rather than
having to stick-build all kinds of sh!t from the past.
This app we've got at Sylvan in very much legacy...created I think in
the late 80s? It's got some weird quirks, and if I were rewriting it
today, I'd certainly do things different, but there are some really fine
areas of this software too--very cool, especially for the timeframe when
they were built. The reports are absolutely the nicest I've ever seen
in terms of professional appearance. But, they really made something
great with lots of functionality, and I just don't see that being easily
replaced. Oh, btw, for those who pay attention---last I said that this
app was going to be replaced by a C# app....no longer the case. The VP
(really sharp guy afaik) does not see us replacing this app just for the
sake of rebuilding it in C# without a clear ROI. Thank God. It's nice
to see that someone wasn't going to simply rewrite for the sake of
rewrite. We do have some areas of the app that we'd like to secure, and
unfortunately, we're stuck with VFP free tables. Sure, we'd like to
have a secure SQL backend, but that's not really possible without a huge
rewrite. Instead, we're going to use vfpencryption.fll on some fields
and perhaps the XiTech Cryptor product. (Although we've heard that
Cryptor has issues with Vista!)
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
