Welcome to the Lounge

Peter.Od13-May-15 9:46

Peter.Od

13-May-15 9:46

It comes down to the-right-tool-for-the-job. I've used Pascal, C, C++, C#, Smalltalk and 4GL frameworks such as Clarion, Dataflex... Also entry-level systems such as MS Access. I've reviewed and use several of the BPM (Business Process Modeling) solutions.

Today, I can do anything I want with C# and .NET. I can do it 3x faster with Smalltalk, if I want to develop highly customized solutions.

I can do a quick-and-dirty database, list and reporting app with Access. This is ok if you want to train the users and limit the number of deployments. Access is an upgrade from using Excel spreadsheets. Access apps are obsolete every time Microsoft introduces their next version of MS-Office.

Some of the BPM systems are highly productive with business process flow and integrating with legacy systems. But, you can't really build highly customized apps or mobile or web solutions without conforming to their limitations.

I took a look at the DevExpress XAF website and some of their videos. It looks great for a .NET shop and in-house apps. I don't think it's appropriate for building public scale apps that may be used by thousands of users via the Internet. For that, a solution like Meteor is better.

I conclude with "use-the-right-tool-for-the-job." With software, if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problems looks like a nail. There is no one framework for all projects.

Another issue to consider, if you do use a framework or system such as DevExpress XAF, make sure you have all the source code so you don't go down in flames if the vendor goes of in a direction not compatible with your objectives, or goes out of business.

We built an ecommerce system for large scale deployments using IBM Visual Age Smalltalk. To this day, we can easily support the system and upgrade to the latest SOAP or REST or ??? features with minimal time, cost and pain. IBM sold this development tool to Instantiations so support and upgrades continue. All the source code to the entire development environment is included. Our experience with Microsoft development tools and platforms is a lot of pain and re-development every time MS jumps to a new paradigm and makes the old obsolete.

I believe programmers are more productive today, but I can't see the need for good developers going away soon. The bigger challenge is the cheap developers over-seas that we have to compete with, if we're based in 1st world countries.

RafagaX13-May-15 12:32

RafagaX

13-May-15 12:32

Wait until they do a major upgrade, and then let me know how much love you still have for them... Poke tongue | ;-P

CEO at:
- Rafaga Systems
- Para Facturas
- Modern Components
for the moment...

Thornik13-May-15 2:11

Thornik

13-May-15 2:11

You're spreading TOO common words for your kind of development. Just say "we use narrow, proprietary platform to make software - please say us again 'we're hooked on their platform!'". You wanna that?

Kirk 1038982113-May-15 2:56

Kirk 10389821

13-May-15 2:56

Let me take a stab at the business decision making process.
(Because when I got started in the 80's, I was told "don't bother" the 4GL tools are so good,
there won't be ANY programming jobs in a decade!" ROTFLMAO)

1) You see this budget for programmers... It is all for "coding"
2) If you had a solution like... X... You could do you're own reports, etc. etc. etc.
3) See that, you don't need to do coding, so you can cut the programmers and SAVE MONEY
...
4) Oh, it takes a LITTLE configuration (eh, a lot like programming), and it has a 3-5 year break even.

To which I say "RUN".
Honestly, someone has to get to the WHY of this decision. Because if it went the above way, they need help. I will gladly warn your management to NOT DO IT.

"low code" appears to be buzz for "very little programming required"... Just configuration.

Which is wonderful... Until you have to do something SPECIFIC... Or worse, beyond the tools ability, design or intent.

For the record, I am not against moving forward. I am replacing an 14 year old system as I type.
But all of that functionality takes a long time to understand, re-envision, and to implement and test. And if it runs your business... What is the worse that could happen? (and we have seen it happen).

Robert g Blair13-May-15 14:11

Robert g Blair

13-May-15 14:11

OK, I started coding around 1979 in Basic on a TRS-80.

I distinctly remember a magazine cover from back then, with a headline like "The End of Coding!".
The lead story was about a tool that would "write your code for you".
You just tell it your requirements, and voila! - a bug-free program is created.

Since then I have watched a never-ending cavalcade of "no more coding" fads march on and off the stage. Clipper, Cognos, Progress, Lansa, Borland ObjectVision, etc.

They are always highly popular with corporate types who salivate at the thought of sacking all those expensive programmers down in IT.

And a war story:

The mid-eighties. I attend a Dec-VAX user group meeting where the highlight is the conversion of an electric utility companies COBOL billing program to COGNOS.

The developer proudly displays the fanfold listing of the COGNOS code, versus the fanfold listing of the COBOL code. The COGNOS listing is about three times thicker.
He says that, currently, the COGNOS program takes more than 16 hours to run, which is NFG, because meter readings flow in constantly. The COBOL program can process a single days billings (meter readings) in 3 hours, which works fine for overnight batch processing.
But he is confident they can optimise the COGNOS program run-times to be "nearly as fast" as the COBOL program.

Later we hear that the IT Director got emergency approval for a Mega-buck or so of new DEC VAX systems to solve the run-time problem for the COGNOS program.

Then we hear that it still won't run overnight, and that the IT Director has asked the board for more money for more VAX'es.

Finally, we hear the IT Director is sacked, and the COGNOS code is ditched.

The IT Director? A week later was Regional Sales Manager for DEC.

I am so impressed again

HobbyProggy11-May-15 21:29

11-May-15 21:29

I mean, they progress so fast now HoloLens / Occulus and this time The Void
Star Trek[^] incomming (Not so holo but quite good).

SFW

if(this.signature != "")
{
    MessageBox.Show("This is my signature: " + Environment.NewLine + signature);
}
else
{
    MessageBox.Show("404-Signature not found");
}

CDP180211-May-15 21:41

11-May-15 21:41

Just join an army of your choice and you will get the most realistic experience. They provide all the equipment and even pay you some money. Big bonus if you ask that screaming drill sarge how you can skip the tutorial.

The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here

This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.

"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."

If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.

HobbyProggy11-May-15 21:51

11-May-15 21:51

Yeah sure

It's not about the fighting it's about the idea and technique Cool | :cool:

if(this.signature != "")
{
    MessageBox.Show("This is my signature: " + Environment.NewLine + signature);
}
else
{
    MessageBox.Show("404-Signature not found");
}

CDP180211-May-15 21:56

11-May-15 21:56

Nothing beats real sand between your teeth, the smell of the powder and actual recoil from your rifle.

OriginalGriff11-May-15 21:58

OriginalGriff

11-May-15 21:58

Or the opposition bullets thudding into your soft flesh...finding a health pack isn't gonna fix this! Laugh | :laugh:

Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...

HobbyProggy11-May-15 22:00

11-May-15 22:00

OriginalGriff wrote:
finding a health pack isn't gonna fix this!

No need for, today you get red eyes and everything's fine as long as no one shoots at you for 10 seconds. Then your good to go again XD

if(this.signature != "")
{
    MessageBox.Show("This is my signature: " + Environment.NewLine + signature);
}
else
{
    MessageBox.Show("404-Signature not found");
}

CDP180211-May-15 23:27

11-May-15 23:27

Did the sarge not say something about keeping your a.... ehem rear parts down?

OriginalGriff11-May-15 23:44

OriginalGriff

11-May-15 23:44

I was running away at the time!

Sorry, sorry - I was making a tactical retreat in order to summon reinforcements.

Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...

CDP180211-May-15 23:45

11-May-15 23:45

Sorry, I did not know that you are from France...

HobbyProggy11-May-15 21:59

11-May-15 21:59

I see, you are no child anymore, you lost the fun on playing?
Btw, Reenactment of war in 1810 does that job for me, those guns had recoil. Todays weapons are smooth Big Grin | :-D

if(this.signature != "")
{
    MessageBox.Show("This is my signature: " + Environment.NewLine + signature);
}
else
{
    MessageBox.Show("404-Signature not found");
}

CDP180211-May-15 23:25

11-May-15 23:25

HobbyProggy wrote:
those guns had recoil

At a rate of about four or five shots per hour you better use a bowling ball as a bullet and about a pound of powder behind it Smile | :)

HobbyProggy11-May-15 23:32

11-May-15 23:32

CDP1802 wrote:
four ~~or five~~ shots per ~~hour~~ minute

FTFY

No seriously, i like shooting modern weapons but the recoil of those old beasts is tough.
And btw, if war would be fought online, we'd have less coffins to fill and could use the money spared somewhere else, where it's truely needed.

if(this.signature != "")
{
    MessageBox.Show("This is my signature: " + Environment.NewLine + signature);
}
else
{
    MessageBox.Show("404-Signature not found");
}

CDP180211-May-15 23:39

11-May-15 23:39

Look to any online game and how the players accuse each other of cheating. Would anyone accept the results of your online war? Would anybody (except France) surrender after being defeated online?

HobbyProggy11-May-15 23:58