PMK said:
On Sun, 3 Jun 2007 07:40:33 +0100, "Baz"
I didn't say only, and it's just a first impression - that is one of
the reasons I was asking for other opinions, but it is because you can
drag and drop so easily, including data connections - makes it easy to
knock off a simple application especially using datagrid type
controls, yet I am finding it unwieldy to deal with those very same
data controls - datasets, etc., manually.
Hang on, you want to use unbound forms and yet you are trying to use
data-bound controls? Sounds like a contradiction to me. Data-bound
controls in Windows forms are indeed clumsy and cumbersome compared to
Access, and if that's what you want stick to Access. The datagrid is
absolutely hopeless when you compare it to what you can do in Access using
linked subforms and continuous forms.
What don't _you_ like about VB.net and VS?
It's a pig to learn. MS appears to have taken every concept in OO
programming known to mankind, and then some more that no-one had ever heard
of, and shoehorned them all into dotnet. It's an over-complex, overblown
smorgasbord of stuff that no-one needs. I hate the colossal dotnet
framework. And I hate the fact that MS killed off "classic" VB, the world's
most popular programming environment, in the face of fierce opposition from
hundreds of thousands of programmers.
I saw your comment about that elsewhere. I don't know why you feel
that bound forms is such a huge benefit of Access, but anyway, I use
unbound a lot primarily because I find it makes validation so much
easier and avoids the complexities of undoing an edit or reversing the
addition of a new record, particularly in a sub form.
Maybe you saw my comment about it elsewhere because you cross-posted!
Bound forms (and reports) are the ONLY benefit of Access. In particular,
Access' two most wonderful features are linked subforms and continuous
forms, both of which go out of the window when you use unbound forms. This
is NOT a criticism of Access, on the contrary, I would rarely use anything
but Access for database applications because nothing else even comes close
to it.
However, if I wanted to build something that consisted of all or mostly
unbound forms then I would even use VB.Net in preference to Access. In
order to achieve it's wonderful bound-forms capabilities Access comes with
all sorts of overheads, and if you don't want bound forms then you don't
need the overheads, as simple as that. If you want an analogy, building
lots of unbound forms in Access is like buying a 4x4 (or an SUV, if you
prefer) and never taking it out of the city. It works, but at a cost which
you don't need to incur.
How do unbound forms make validation easier? In a bound form you just stick
all your validation in the form's BeforeUpdate event procedure and you're
done. Undoing an edit? Press the Esc key (or click Undo on the menu).
Reversing the addition of a new record? Delete it. How else would you do
it? If you add a record through a bound form or an unbound form you still
need to delete it if it's a mistake. With a bound form you can do these
things without having to write a line of code, with unbound forms you have
to program all of these functions. How is that easier?
You are using unbound subforms? How, exactly?
