Templates, RAD or something else...?

Hi all,

I have some general(ish) questions about the best way to develop in WD with reuseability and efficiency in mind. I was hoping to use RAD (and still may do that), and now I'm looking into the possiblities of using templates to code a large %age of my windows..

What's the general consensus out there on the most efficient and effective way to develop...?

Many people out there don't seem to use RAD... is that because it's too complex or because you've already got established systems written some other way?

I'm just starting out developing my system and I'm currently looking at templates, but there seem to be many limitations - for instance, if you have some code in a button event for example, the code is locked and you can't really insert lines of code "here and there" where you'd like (unless I'm missing something), so my question here is do people use templates and if so, do they tend to unlock the widnow from the template so they can code it fully?

Do people out there use the Code Bricks features?

Oh, so many questions...

Thanks in advance for any feedback...

Hello Darren,

I don't use RAD but I use templates. You can overload each control of the template by right-clicking it and choose 'Overload the control'. After taht you get your own events where the 'parent-event'is triggered (ExecuteAncestor). You can place code before and.or after that statement.

HTH.

Hi Louis,

Thanks for replying...

Yes, I've been looking into templates and the Overload feature. It's a pity that the template code isn't at a line level, as I'd like to put as much code as possible in the template and "slot" my code in (as I say) "here and there".

For example; if you had a need for a SWITCH statement in your template such as:

SWITCH RADIO_CHOICE
	CASE 1
		(Your code here later...)
	CASE 2
		(Your code here later...)
	CASE 3
		(Your code here later...)
	CASE 4
		(Your code here later...)
	OTHER CASE 
		(Your code here later...)
END

I'd like to be able to slot my code in the bits marked <Your code here> - perhaps this line level re-use is an enhancement for the furture?

Do you unlock your windows from the template?

Do you use Code Bricks?

Cheers...

Hi, I'm using procedural RAD with maximized windows in MDI - extensively. I do not intend to change over into the OOP camp. You can't teach an old dog new tricks. Maybe, it's that. Maybe I'm just lazy. Who knows?

If you're using RAD, you have to understand the code and the idea behind it. Works quite fine for Form, Table, Vision+, Table+Table. All others ignored. In the Form window there is just one bug left in code for the OK-button. The Vision+ window needs three lines of code or so to deliver the result in the correct combo on a Form or on a Tab-control.

A big percentage of windows can be done using RAD - provided the project is big enough. If your project has 100+ windows you're just burning money (and your time) if you're going without any mechanism that unifies the look and feel of your application. This can be templates or it can be RAD. I'd applaud if PC Soft would give us a mechnism to build a window (a wdw-file) by code only. This would enable some clever guy to write a full-application RAD that really works with all the quality that is needed for end-users.

Making a window with RAD gives you a starting point, not the finished window. In order to produce good and persistent quality you have to have a cook book that gives a general outline for each window type.

Maybe, I can find some time to publish my RAD cook book in English. Everything's in German right now.

Best regards,
Guenter

Hi Guenter,

Thanks for taking the time as always...

I want to use RAD, but it doesn't look like RAD is the "press of a button" solution I was hoping. You mention the quiality of RAD generated windows for end users - I agree, there seems to be a fair amount of work required to "finish off" the application after RAD has done it's bit.

My analysis has approx. 70 tables at the moment (and growing), so 100+ windows is a great possibility. This doesn't include any ad-hoc transaction files etc...

I was thinking I could use templates and code bricks, but as I discuss above, template code isn't at a line level. My hope for templates was for line level code and I could slot in my own code where I need it... unfortunately that's not the way that works either. :-(

A cook book sounds great!... and just what I'm longing for - could you have it ready for tomorrow?

Cheers...

Quote
DarrenF
Hi Guenter,

Thanks for taking the time as always...

I want to use RAD, but it doesn't look like RAD is the "press of a button" solution I was hoping. You mention the quiality of RAD generated windows for end users - I agree, there seems to be a fair amount of work required to "finish off" the application after RAD has done it's bit.

My analysis has approx. 70 tables at the moment (and growing), so 100+ windows is a great possibility. This doesn't include any ad-hoc transaction files etc...

I was thinking I could use templates and code bricks, but as I discuss above, template code isn't at a line level. My hope for templates was for line level code and I could slot in my own code where I need it... unfortunately that's not the way that works either. :-(

A cook book sounds great!... and just what I'm longing for - could you have it ready for tomorrow?

Cheers...
___________________________________________
Regards,
Darren Farmer.

Hi Darren, no, unfortunately RAD is not a 'press of a button' solution and maybe, will never be. It could be, but that alone would result in a separate software package in its own right and would be of considerable size. As I said, no one else except PC Soft could do that since the structure of wdw- and wdp-files still is a business secret of theirs. As we all could see, PC Soft tries to attack that pending problem with a new type of RAD which eventually can evolve into a future 'big' RAD. But I just want to have working windows, so I stay with the proven 'RAD11' which is unchanged since version 10 :rp:

If your analysis has 70+ tables (aka files) then you will end up with approx. 300 windows for maintenance of those files alone. That seems to be quite a lot but the only way to reduce that number is by reducing functionality and uniformity for the users. IMHO, unification is one of the keys to ease of use.

Before using RAD, the correct input of the analysis info is another point to reduce the amount of work necessary after using RAD to make a window. The output of RAD depends on the quality of the data within the analysis.

Though the different windows made by RAD do not work smoothlessly together from the start - they can easily be made to do so.

I'll try to publish my cook book ...

Kind regards,
Guenter

Hi Guenter,

Thanks for the info... it's much appreciated :spos:

Sorry... when I say Tables I do mean Files... I've been using Oracle for too long!

I'll be using WD12 RAD... but I'm sure a RAD11 Cook Book is still very relavant

Hi. I hace tested the new RAD version in WD12 and the windows resultant is a more "Like Clarion" RAD . For example, from a Table window type now you have buttons to access the data from child tables. This allow the user simplify the access to data.