Rick Schummer wrote: >>> Can someone comment as to why you would want to design a NON-VISUAL class >>> > in a VCX (other than preferring the GUI look for seeing the methods/events > in dropdowns)?<< > > I think the big loss using PRG-based classes is the loss of Builders and > Property Editors. I use > these on a regular basis and would not want to give up this productivity > booster. I also feel > IntelliSense is more robust inside a VCX-based class than a PRG-based one. > > I use both mostly because some classes can only be done in PRGs. Like Dave I > often find myself > tinkering and designing in a PRG and then migrate to a VCX when I get closer > to what I think is the > best solution. > > One of the reasons Bo moved the GDI+ code to PRGs is the size of the source > code. I forget the > numbers, but in the case of GDI+ the PRGs add significantly less bytes to the > resulting EXE. Less > memory and less EXE to pull over the wire results is a performance boost. > >
Thanks for your comments, Rick et al. I like VCX for VISUAL stuff (hence the subject of the post) but PRG for non-visual abstraction classes. Also, something in my mind feels more comfortable about PRG integration with VSS as opposed to VCX integration with VSS (since text vs. binary files). UPDATE: I moved a Reporting class over to a VCX today and I actually like the Intellisense and IDE assistance! Perhaps a change for this guy! Lesson learned: try the other side sometimes or occasionally revisit it...you might like it! -- Michael J. Babcock, MCP MB Software Solutions, LLC http://mbsoftwaresolutions.com http://fabmate.com "Work smarter, not harder, with MBSS custom software solutions!" _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://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.
