Jürgen Schmidt wrote:
OOBasic as a programming language is quite simple and similar to VB. What you mean is the API which of course is completely different than the API from MS. I agree that we can make things easier, we have learned a lot and we will address these things in the future. Even for OOBasic we will introduce more syntactical suggar (as MS did it) to make things easier.
I converted a macro I used for cost estimating. I don't really see too much wrong with OOBasic. It's the object hierarchy that is so complex and that makes it hard to write a simple procedure. I spent hours (must be thick skulled) trying to figure out where the methods were to address the data I wanted to manipulate. I also spent hours, but I think far fewer, writing the original macro in MS VB. I am willing to put in the study time.
The reference help for MSVB is much better organized I think. This certainly helped a lot in writing the original macro. I think that documentation is, in large part, at fault here.
I have a macro in MSVB for generating a price catalog in MS Word from an inventory report, which I just dread tackling. I'm guessing more than a few hours will be spent converting this one. It loads pictures and descriptive text from files based on inventory numbers. It also formats text based on embedded formatting codes of my own design. Something like the old Xerox Ventura Publisher. There is possibly a better way to do this, but I haven't thought it out yet. I'll take suggestions. :-)
I think the different object structure and documentation are both factors here.
Alex --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
