I'm going to be sick.


DevX Home    Today's Headlines   Articles Archive   Tip Bank   Forums   

Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: I'm going to be sick.

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    D. Patrick Hoerter Guest

    I'm going to be sick.

    Skimming MS's whitepapers, I came across this dreadful quote:

    <snip>
    COM+ will also include innovative, easy-to-use services based on features
    pioneered by COM-enabled tools such as Visual Basic. A key service is
    declarative data binding. This is very similar to the data binding currently
    offered by Visual Basic in forms. In Visual Basic, you drop data source and
    data-bound controls on a form, bind the data source control to a database,
    and bind the data-bound controls to specific database fields. With COM+,
    classes are decorated with a class attribute of the database to connect to.
    A class contains one or more data source fields that also have some of their
    properties defined, such as the SQL statement to execute. Data-bound fields
    are associated with a data source field and columns of its query results.
    Whenever the data source field is updated, all bound fields are updated with
    values that match the associated columns. Data binding is enabled by a
    binding engine, which is a runtime interceptor for all instances of classes
    that have data binding support. This engine ensures that when an instance is
    activated, the proper data source connection is obtained and associated with
    the instance.
    </snip>

    What is the world coming to? Any comments?

    If this "fancy binding" trend continues, I may have to take up basketweaving
    or pottery as a vocation. Just when I though I couldn't deal with any more
    binding-heads, here comes MS with another great "feature", for the
    quiche-eating sect, I suppose.

    I think I'm going to retch. I should probably give up my programmer's
    mountain boots and SUV, while I'm at it. Oh, the _shame_!


    Regards,
    D. Patrick Hoerter





  2. #2
    Alessandro Coppo Guest

    Re: I'm going to be sick.


    "D. Patrick Hoerter" wrote:

    > What is the world coming to? Any comments?
    >
    > If this "fancy binding" trend continues, I may have to take up basketweaving
    > or pottery as a vocation. Just when I though I couldn't deal with any more
    > binding-heads, here comes MS with another great "feature", for the
    > quiche-eating sect, I suppose.
    >
    > I think I'm going to retch. I should probably give up my programmer's
    > mountain boots and SUV, while I'm at it. Oh, the _shame_!


    The amusing thing is that when VB x comes out, everybody chants praises to
    so-easy-to-create-with-binding applications. In 6-12 month first you see VBPJ
    letters complaining about slowness, resources and bugs and lastily an article on
    VBPJ which shows you how to do the think programmatically, leaving aside
    bindings and so on, with a side column explaining that the automatic way could
    not be fast, scalable etc.etc. ... and then you see the sneak preview of VB x+1
    in which data bindings are just great...


  3. #3
    Keith Franklin, MCSD Guest

    Re: I'm going to be sick.

    Prior to VB6 I I never used Data Binding in an application (other then
    quicky test apps)...But with the new OLE DB binding in VB6 I tried it and
    contrary to popular belief it is not a bad thing if you use the new
    DataSource options of VB6 classes to bind disconnected recordsets. I
    actually wrote an article for VBPJ (Cover article March 2000 VBPJ
    "Supercharge Data Binding") the articles sample application does not even
    use a database to accomplish some very interesting things. Take a look at it
    before you totally write off binding.

    If VB7 extends the concept introduced in VB6 it wont be a bad thing.

    Can binding controls to a live table or cursor in a database hurt
    things...Yes...Can binding controls to classes make things quicker, easier,
    and not ruin scalability...You bet...


    --
    Keith Franklin, MCSD
    Senior Solution Developer Achitect
    ka_franklin@empowered.com

    Empowered Software Solutions, Inc.
    Microsoft Certified Solution Provider
    www.empowered.com

    "Alessandro Coppo" <a.coppo@iol.it> wrote in message
    news:394703DC.C1622F10@iol.it...
    >
    > "D. Patrick Hoerter" wrote:
    >
    > > What is the world coming to? Any comments?
    > >
    > > If this "fancy binding" trend continues, I may have to take up

    basketweaving
    > > or pottery as a vocation. Just when I though I couldn't deal with any

    more
    > > binding-heads, here comes MS with another great "feature", for the
    > > quiche-eating sect, I suppose.
    > >
    > > I think I'm going to retch. I should probably give up my programmer's
    > > mountain boots and SUV, while I'm at it. Oh, the _shame_!

    >
    > The amusing thing is that when VB x comes out, everybody chants praises to
    > so-easy-to-create-with-binding applications. In 6-12 month first you see

    VBPJ
    > letters complaining about slowness, resources and bugs and lastily an

    article on
    > VBPJ which shows you how to do the think programmatically, leaving aside
    > bindings and so on, with a side column explaining that the automatic way

    could
    > not be fast, scalable etc.etc. ... and then you see the sneak preview of

    VB x+1
    > in which data bindings are just great...
    >




  4. #4
    Matthew Cromer Guest

    Re: I'm going to be sick.


    "Keith Franklin, MCSD" <ka_franklin@empowered.com> wrote:
    >Prior to VB6 I I never used Data Binding in an application (other then
    >quicky test apps)...But with the new OLE DB binding in VB6 I tried it and
    >contrary to popular belief it is not a bad thing if you use the new
    >DataSource options of VB6 classes to bind disconnected recordsets. I
    >actually wrote an article for VBPJ (Cover article March 2000 VBPJ
    >"Supercharge Data Binding") the articles sample application does not even
    >use a database to accomplish some very interesting things. Take a look at

    it
    >before you totally write off binding.
    >
    >If VB7 extends the concept introduced in VB6 it wont be a bad thing.
    >
    >Can binding controls to a live table or cursor in a database hurt
    >things...Yes...Can binding controls to classes make things quicker, easier,
    >and not ruin scalability...You bet...
    >
    >
    >--
    >Keith Franklin, MCSD
    >Senior Solution Developer Achitect
    >ka_franklin@empowered.com


    I've written a framework that works somewhat like binding in that you place
    controls on a form, type the name of the field as a property of the controls
    that "bind" to that field, a "datasource" control, etc. However this framework
    is writtin in code, I have complete control over the process, the controls
    do validation, etc.

    I don't see much utility to standard VB binding behavior where the application
    programmer gives away so much control over the application behavior, regardless
    of whether or not you are binding to a database or to a disconnected recordset.

    Matthew Cromer
    President, SDA Consulting, Inc.

  5. #5
    Keith Franklin, MCSD Guest

    Re: I'm going to be sick.

    Look at the technique and describe to me where I have given up control...

    I have not received one reply where developers felt that they lost control
    of the application...In fact it is the opposite...

    Later


    --
    Keith Franklin, MCSD
    Senior Solution Developer Achitect
    ka_franklin@empowered.com

    Empowered Software Solutions, Inc.
    Microsoft Certified Solution Provider
    www.empowered.com



    "Matthew Cromer" <matthew@sdaconsulting.com> wrote in message
    news:3947b9b2$1@news.devx.com...
    >
    > "Keith Franklin, MCSD" <ka_franklin@empowered.com> wrote:
    > >Prior to VB6 I I never used Data Binding in an application (other then
    > >quicky test apps)...But with the new OLE DB binding in VB6 I tried it and
    > >contrary to popular belief it is not a bad thing if you use the new
    > >DataSource options of VB6 classes to bind disconnected recordsets. I
    > >actually wrote an article for VBPJ (Cover article March 2000 VBPJ
    > >"Supercharge Data Binding") the articles sample application does not even
    > >use a database to accomplish some very interesting things. Take a look at

    > it
    > >before you totally write off binding.
    > >
    > >If VB7 extends the concept introduced in VB6 it wont be a bad thing.
    > >
    > >Can binding controls to a live table or cursor in a database hurt
    > >things...Yes...Can binding controls to classes make things quicker,

    easier,
    > >and not ruin scalability...You bet...
    > >
    > >
    > >--
    > >Keith Franklin, MCSD
    > >Senior Solution Developer Achitect
    > >ka_franklin@empowered.com

    >
    > I've written a framework that works somewhat like binding in that you

    place
    > controls on a form, type the name of the field as a property of the

    controls
    > that "bind" to that field, a "datasource" control, etc. However this

    framework
    > is writtin in code, I have complete control over the process, the controls
    > do validation, etc.
    >
    > I don't see much utility to standard VB binding behavior where the

    application
    > programmer gives away so much control over the application behavior,

    regardless
    > of whether or not you are binding to a database or to a disconnected

    recordset.
    >
    > Matthew Cromer
    > President, SDA Consulting, Inc.




  6. #6
    Vlad Ivanov Guest

    Re: I'm going to be sick.


    I use binding. It works well. We use the disconnected recordset technique
    for sending data to/from server. Controls are bound directly to the recordset.
    Convenient. Much faster for grids then using a loop. No complains to MS on
    binding. Though i have a need for a few things in ADO, like been able to
    get a real clone (more a copy) of a recordset without writing code. Blah
    blah etc. To sum it up, binding is the area where i for once don't have much
    problems.

    P.S. We too got some form of a framework, so your mileage may vary.

  7. #7
    Keith Franklin, MCSD Guest

    Re: I'm going to be sick.

    Vlad,

    It is a touch of a hack but with ADO 2.5 you can save a Recordset to a ADO
    Stream object then open another recordset with the stream and you have a
    real copy not a clone

    Dim oADOStream as ADODB.Stream

    set oADOStream = new ADODB.Stream
    oRS.Save oADOStream
    Set oRS2 = new ADO.Recordset
    oRS2.Open oADOStream

    Later


    --
    Keith Franklin, MCSD
    Senior Solution Developer Achitect
    ka_franklin@empowered.com

    Empowered Software Solutions, Inc.
    Microsoft Certified Solution Provider
    www.empowered.com

    "Vlad Ivanov" <vivanov@polarisconsulting.com> wrote in message
    news:3947f623$1@news.devx.com...
    >
    > I use binding. It works well. We use the disconnected recordset technique
    > for sending data to/from server. Controls are bound directly to the

    recordset.
    > Convenient. Much faster for grids then using a loop. No complains to MS on
    > binding. Though i have a need for a few things in ADO, like been able to
    > get a real clone (more a copy) of a recordset without writing code. Blah
    > blah etc. To sum it up, binding is the area where i for once don't have

    much
    > problems.
    >
    > P.S. We too got some form of a framework, so your mileage may vary.




  8. #8
    Vlad Ivanov Guest

    Re: I'm going to be sick.


    Hey, great! Thanks!

    That's a great idea - i will try it. The other way (in ADO 2.1 was to persist
    it to disk with .Save, but it looked little slow this way).

    1. Hmmm... Here's another request to MS: I need a way to be able to add custom
    properties to Properties collections of Field and Recordset object. I know
    it's possible in Visual C - something has to to with custom providers. But
    i'd like top append some metadata to my recordsets before sending them to
    a client machine. Now i have it implemented as a variant array. Works well,
    but requires an additional trip to the server.

    2. Wouldn't it make sense to allow modification to existing properties? Such
    as i sometimes need to modify CanBeNull and IsNullable flags on Field object's
    properties. The problem is that certain database drivers set those flags
    inconveniently (****, i need an example here but can't think of one).

    3. It would be a great help to be able to determine an identity value PRIOR
    to using it. When i receive disconnected recordset and use .AddNew, i'd like
    to be able to know what Identity field's value is going to be when saved
    (now it shows Null untill saved).



  9. #9
    Michael \(michka\) Kaplan Guest

    Re: I'm going to be sick.

    "Vlad Ivanov" <vivanov@polarisconsulting.com> wrote in message
    news:3948dbfb@news.devx.com...
    > 2. Wouldn't it make sense to allow modification to existing properties?

    Such
    > as i sometimes need to modify CanBeNull and IsNullable flags on Field

    object's
    > properties. The problem is that certain database drivers set those flags
    > inconveniently (****, i need an example here but can't think of one).


    It would, but this is a major archiedtural issue in OLE DB... where the
    field object does not let you modify schema, period. It wouldb e possible
    but it would mean HUGE change in OLE DB.

    > 3. It would be a great help to be able to determine an identity value

    PRIOR
    > to using it. When i receive disconnected recordset and use .AddNew, i'd

    like
    > to be able to know what Identity field's value is going to be when saved
    > (now it shows Null untill saved).


    This is an architecural one for SQL Server.... they do not assign the value
    until save time, now.

    --
    MichKa
    "Cause it's a bittersweet symphony, thats life..." -- The Verve

    random junk of dubious value, at the multilingual,
    no scripts required, http://www.trigeminal.com/




Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
HTML5 Development Center
 
 
FAQ
Latest Articles
Java
.NET
XML
Database
Enterprise
Questions? Contact us.
C++
Web Development
Wireless
Latest Tips
Open Source


   Development Centers

   -- Android Development Center
   -- Cloud Development Project Center
   -- HTML5 Development Center
   -- Windows Mobile Development Center