Vulcan .Net and VO 2.8
in [Visual Objects]
|
From: Patrick Vletter (Prive) on 21 Sep 2006 19:34 Mullet/Jamie, No one said anything about a change in the underlying Windows API or whatever. AFAIU Geoff plans on using VO actively in the next few years. I assume that means that he needs fixes to the things that are not functioning the way they should be at this point. 2.8 delivers these fixes (among other things)... AFAIU Geoff plans on interfacing his VO code from within .NET. That will mean that he has to sometimes change things just a little bit just to make ..NET understand them. For example .NET will have problems understandig a ragged Array. If Geoff wants to expose his array to .NET he might need to change it into an XML-stream of whatever... If your doing that kind of coding I would be doing it in a supported version of VO. That version will be 2.8 by the end of this year... Oh, and BTW: 2.8 brings other things that make the VO IDE even more productive than it is already according to Geoff's own words... I've used the new editor and SCC-integration for a while now and would not even consider going back... Capici? Patrick "Mullet" <mullet(a)yahoo.ca> wrote in message news:8JEQg.35129$E67.883(a)clgrps13... > Are there some up and coming changes to the Window API that we are all > missing? Will these theoretical API changes be supported by 2.8 and not > 2.7? Explain how 2.8 is required for Geoff support legacy code. > > "Patrick Vletter (Prive)" <NoWay(a)spam.org> wrote in message > news:451315b8$0$10954$e4fe514c(a)dreader30.news.xs4all.nl... >> Geoff, >> >> How do you plan to keep on capitalizing on your VO-code for the years to >> come if you do not upgrade to 2.8? >> Sounds like a paradox to me... >> >> Patrick >> >> "Geoff Schaller" <geoff(a)xxxsoftwareobjectives.com.au> wrote in message >> news:45130ef7$1(a)dnews.tpgi.com.au... >>> Marc, >>> >>> Correct. Again the disappointing thing is how little new stuff is in 2.8 >>> and little of the GUI classes are properly fixed. ...and how much of the >>> promised things aren't there. A new editor is really just a fix for the >>> old one (and an acknowledgment it couldn't be fixed) but for all that, >>> it worked. Given our slow migration away from VO to C# I don't know yet >>> whether it will be worth the upgrade money. I guess we will wait for >>> reviews in here and certainly the first patch. There is always a patch - >>> in fact there are always several <g>. Had there been more new stuff and >>> more of the requested fixes my attitude might have been different. >>> >>> Geoff >>> >>> >>> "Marc Verkade [Marti IT]" <marcatM(a)rtidotnl> wrote in message >>> news:45128fe0$0$69153$58c7af7e(a)news.kabelfoon.nl: >>> >>>> Yes, >>>> But an expectation was raised! >>>> Grtz, Marc >>> >> >> > >
From: Stephen Quinn on 21 Sep 2006 21:00 Marc Nah they've got to be Appears or Papples, Peaples depending on the parent tree CYA Steve
From: @je on 21 Sep 2006 23:28 Hai Pat, We have been getting by with our current version of 2.7 for over a year now, that doesn't change. If the new editor in 2.8 and the VSS-integration is as good as you say it is it probably will be worth the price of the upgrade (although I feel we have already paid for the VSS-bit as that seems to be only bugfixes or finishing the un-finished implementation). I'll take your word for it. However the disappointing bit _to me_ is that we have been promised significant enhancements in the past, seriously announced at several conferences, like unicode support for dbf's, web service integration, xml, the ability to build you own repo (which would greatly enhance the way we have to deal with code shared among different projects). None of that in 2.8. >> 2.8 delivers these fixes (among other things)... So, it is a paid for new Editor and some enhancements which are often described as "several fixes" or "Fixed several errors". As I said, disappointing after this long wait. Greetz, Ed "Patrick Vletter (Prive)" <NoWay(a)spam.org> wrote in message news:4513219e$0$22439$e4fe514c(a)dreader26.news.xs4all.nl... > Oh, and BTW: 2.8 brings other things that make the VO IDE even more > productive than it is already according to Geoff's own words... > I've used the new editor and SCC-integration for a while now and would not > even consider going back... > > Capici? > > Patrick
From: Karl Faller on 22 Sep 2006 02:36 Alex, >It will be simple if/when Microsoft finishes what it started with CodeDom Exactly. >I wonder when that will be? .NET 3? .NET 4? .NEVER? I see nothing for the near future ;-/ Karl
From: Patrick Vletter (Prive) on 22 Sep 2006 02:39
Hi Ed, How are you doing these day's. Enjoying the southern hemishepere? > We have been getting by with our current version of 2.7 for over a year > now, that doesn't change. But that version (I presume 2740?) still contains quiet a few nasty problems that are solved in the current implementation we use. I'm convinced that every serious VO developer owes it to himself to upgrade to 2.8, just for the sake of these bugfixes alone. > If the new editor in 2.8 and the VSS-integration is as good as you say it > is it probably will be worth the price of the upgrade (although I feel we > have already paid for the VSS-bit as that seems to be only bugfixes or > finishing the un-finished implementation). I'll take your word for it. Thx<g>. > However the disappointing bit _to me_ is that we have been promised > significant enhancements in the past, seriously announced at several > conferences, like unicode support for dbf's, web service integration, xml, > the ability to build you own repo (which would greatly enhance the way we > have to deal with code shared among different projects). None of that in > 2.8. Can't help you with that, but isn't this what happens in lot's of software products? A project is being planned and new specifications are drawn. During the project some of this new functionality is dropped for whatever reason the product-owner has. It happens in my company as wel... I agree that customers can be disappointed about that, but than it is up to them to decide if they still like the downgraded package enough to put down their money for it. As I said before, this upgrade is well worth every penny for us just for the fact that it enhances the stability and productivity of our developers.... > Greetz, > Ed Send my greetings to Yvonne and the kids, Patrick |