While not starting a debate BUT

  • Thread starter Thread starter Warex
  • Start date Start date
W

Warex

Is there any differences between using the wizards to call the Data objects
VS. just coding them.

VB6 there was a performance and size issue to use active x controls thus
coding was more prevelant and perfered.

but with vb2005, does that hold true as vb6, given the Power, speed, HD size
of computers?

Know most is personal choice but I would like to know.

From what I am reading It seems to be I may be trying to re-invent the
wheel.........

Power of the Darkside is strong...........
 
I'm not sure exactly which wizard you're talking about.
If you're talking about the DataSet Designer, or using
the wizard to set up a Data source, there's no reason to
do it programmatically unless you just like to type.


Robin S.
 
Adapter, Dataset, table, all those.
RobinS said:
I'm not sure exactly which wizard you're talking about.
If you're talking about the DataSet Designer, or using
the wizard to set up a Data source, there's no reason to
do it programmatically unless you just like to type.


Robin S.
Click to expand...
 
Although, as Ken says, some of the wizards create strongly typed datasets,
that does not mean that you can't code strongly typed datasets yourself.

Before one can determine if one will get any benefit from using a wizard,
one has to know if one can tust the code that is produced by that wizard.
One of the fun things to do with the code that a wizard produces is to
dissect it to see what techniques have been used and how they have been
implemented. Some of those techniques are more advanced than those you might
find in a book or in the product documentation.

If I require just the basic functionality then using a wizard is certainly a
time saver.

If I require additional functionality then I often start with the code
produced by a wizard using a wizard and enhance it with what I need.
 
Stephany Young wrote:
One of the fun things to do with the code that a wizard produces is to
dissect it to see what techniques have been used and how they have been
implemented. Some of those techniques are more advanced than those you might
find in a book or in the product documentation.
Click to expand...
<snip>

On the other side, some of then just "abuse" the fact that they're
wizard managed. For instance, a programmer would try to use inheritance
to his/her advantage, something that current wizardry doesn't seem to
like.

An example of this is the structure of the DataTables generated by the
DataSet wizard. It is very difficult to introduce common behavior to
all your DataTables -- even taking advantage of partial classes --
because they're direct descendants of System.DataTable.

Just as you can customize the inheritancy of TableAdapters, I suppose
the DataTables could also descend from a custom class.

The consequence is that you'll see tons of
redundant-repeating-extremely long-winded lines of code, something that
a "real" programmer would try to encapsulate... The code seems
definitely for wizard eyes, only... I am using a wizard generated
DataSet with some 20 tables, and the wizard code really looks like a
complete mess.

My R$ 0,05 (as for current currency)

Regards,

Branco.
 
Warex,

I set this in the mainthread but am in fact responding to Stephany's and
Branco's message as well.

Although I don't like the way how it is done (but that is never more to
change), the wizards give you the advantage that there are uniform names
created.

The part that Bronco discuss is in my opinion not anymore, you can use
partial classes to set extentions to the by the wizards created code.

Although I agree that you never can do everything with the by the wizard
created code, it is as well strongly based on databinding.

And as last there is nothing wrong to start a (constructive) debate in this
newsgroup, that is the main reason where Usenet is fore and this is a UseNet
newsgroup.

Just my thought,

Cor
 
I agreee with you Branco ,

I still have the idea that my own code is much faster and cleaner
But indeed i do use the wizards a lot , but if i need to write a fast
performing data manipulating app , i prefer to write my own code

I also see that a lot of "new" coders don`t even now how to do things
without the wizzards ( i call them drag drop pilots :-)
sometimes when we run into somekind of weird problem i can still solve
things by writing my own custom code , those people can only give up , and
blame MS

I am not happy with the fact that dragging and dropping ( and having no idea
what is generated behind the scenes) seems to get the coding standard , this
is really a bad thing for our proffession , however it is also making me
more worth as i already encountered a few projects wher a form was
worthless because the designer corrupted it ( drag drop , delete in wrong
order :-) i could easily recover them by correcting the code in the code
behind classes . where others had already taken the loss of a day work and
switched back to a backup version of there project .

I am a coder , and a coder is someone who can read and write code


regards

Michel Posseth [MCP]
 
I have to agree Michel.

Unfortunately, there are far too many of these 'new coders', as you call
them, being churned out by so-called educational establishmentsm where they
have been taught how to use the wizards and not much else.


Michel Posseth said:
I agreee with you Branco ,

I still have the idea that my own code is much faster and cleaner
But indeed i do use the wizards a lot , but if i need to write a fast
performing data manipulating app , i prefer to write my own code

I also see that a lot of "new" coders don`t even now how to do things
without the wizzards ( i call them drag drop pilots :-)
sometimes when we run into somekind of weird problem i can still solve
things by writing my own custom code , those people can only give up , and
blame MS

I am not happy with the fact that dragging and dropping ( and having no
idea what is generated behind the scenes) seems to get the coding standard
, this is really a bad thing for our proffession , however it is also
making me more worth as i already encountered a few projects wher a form
was worthless because the designer corrupted it ( drag drop , delete in
wrong order :-) i could easily recover them by correcting the code in
the code behind classes . where others had already taken the loss of a day
work and switched back to a backup version of there project .

I am a coder , and a coder is someone who can read and write code


regards

Michel Posseth [MCP]




Branco Medeiros said:
Stephany Young wrote:

<snip>

On the other side, some of then just "abuse" the fact that they're
wizard managed. For instance, a programmer would try to use inheritance
to his/her advantage, something that current wizardry doesn't seem to
like.

An example of this is the structure of the DataTables generated by the
DataSet wizard. It is very difficult to introduce common behavior to
all your DataTables -- even taking advantage of partial classes --
because they're direct descendants of System.DataTable.

Just as you can customize the inheritancy of TableAdapters, I suppose
the DataTables could also descend from a custom class.

The consequence is that you'll see tons of
redundant-repeating-extremely long-winded lines of code, something that
a "real" programmer would try to encapsulate... The code seems
definitely for wizard eyes, only... I am using a wizard generated
DataSet with some 20 tables, and the wizard code really looks like a
complete mess.

My R$ 0,05 (as for current currency)

Regards,

Branco.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Michel said:
I still have the idea that my own code is much faster and cleaner
But indeed i do use the wizards a lot , but if i need to write a fast
performing data manipulating app , i prefer to write my own code

I am a coder , and a coder is someone who can read and write code
Click to expand...

I agree also. I like to use a code generator like CodeSmith where you
can control what gets generated by changing the code. Then you can
have the best of both worlds!
 
Back
Top