I happen to think remote views suck, but maybe I was just doing it wrong.
I think everything having to do with VFP's built-in buffering system,
including views, sucks. It seems like you have to stand on one leg on
alternate Wednesdays under a full moon to get data written to the disk and
reliably returned to the user. Update-conflict detection actually doesn't
work at all if you don't bind data to something, and data binding takes a
huge amount of control away from the developer. I ended up leaving
buffering turned off and writing my own framework code to detect and
resolve update conflicts.
And while I haven't yet implemented a live system using a non-VFP database,
in all my testing with MySQL I've found SPT to be perfectly adequate and a
lot easier to understand than views.
But I'm sure there will be some people who will tell me, or you, that we
are, indeed, doing it wrong. Hence the controversy.
Ken Dibble
www.stic-cil.org
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message:
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected]
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
