On Thu, March 15, 2007 3:40 pm, Andrew Lentvorski wrote: > Lan Barnes wrote: > >> Agreed, but data driven programs can be way-cool when done by someone who >> knows how. > > I consider all programs to be data dirven, but I'll let you clarify.
I won't dispute your statement, although it's a little like saying "everything found on planet earth is a 'natural ingredient'." ;-) I can best illustrate what I mean by data driven programs by a simple example. Say I have a task to develop a data base program which is front end screens and back end server. 1. I can draw or hard code a gazillion screens. 2. I can take the time to write a generalized front end that finds how to draw the screens by hitting the data base for such things as size, color, background text, input fields, etc etc. Method 1 is quick and dirty and guarantees a maintenace ... challenge ... as things change, which they always do. PHBs really like method 1. Method 2 has a big front end programming load, but makes screen development on this and subsequent programs like this lots faster and makes maintenance a relative breeze. Wherever there is a change in a screen, you just add, delete, or edit the screen data (now considered metadata) in the back end. If you're really serious, method two is better. PHBs usually don't get method 2 and consider it yet another case of the bit twiddlers wanting to play instead of doing real work. Method 2 is what I would characterize as data driven programming. NB: There is a method 3 which I will be presenting in April since I can't seem to weasel out of it any longer. It is much beter than method 1 but not as costly (in the front end) or as cool as method 2. But I can't tell you more right now because I'm trying to build suspense :-) <some BCCs> -- Lan Barnes SCM Analyst Linux Guy Tcl/Tk Enthusiast Biodiesel Brewer -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
