Ed Leafe wrote:
> I should clarify: the 'users' of Dabo are programmers and  
> developers, not the folks commonly referred to as 'end-users'.
As I said I follow along the list skipping some stuff and might have missed a 
change in direction.

I thought the object was to end up with a VFP like environment? Surely, in VFP, 
you never have to program in the language it was written in? If VFP is at all 
like Filemaker then the user can design an app with minimal programming skills.

I am not saying that if dabo is not what I have described above is a bad thing. 
Just looking for clarification.

Also, some of the debate on this topic indicates one of the problems with open 
source - there are just too many different ways to do things. I can already 
here shouts of, "Well, that's a good thing". Let me make an analogy to show why 
less is sometimes more.

Music, at least 'Western' music uses a very limited part of the sound spectrum. 
Yet what seems a restriction allows the creation of great beauty and great 
complexity. If everyone was free to tune there instrument to whatever part of 
the sound spectrum they chose there would be very little music and it would be 
rather simple. Most of all it would be rather sad as it would be an individual 
activity.

Choosing a tool for RAD DB development, a tool like VPF or Filemaker, imposes 
this kind of limited spectrum. Sometimes (speaking for Filemaker here) one is 
frustrated by the limits but those limits, that framework does allow one to get 
on with the job,

Norman



_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/dabo-users

Reply via email to