Bound Controls

I have read many things about bound controsl(data control, dblist,db combo etc) and I have seen many answers which do not like boutnd controls.

Why not buond conrtols. What is not right with them?

Nothing is really wrong with them, they just aren't popular among most programmers. They rather do their own code to connect to the database, and therefore have more control over what they can and can't do.

I use them for listing data in grids...

(ok guys confess ! :p )

Like my signature says, I don't do databases. I can't even get the data control to do what I want. :rolleyes: ;)

No programmer worthy of being called a programmer uses Bound Controls.

Read the link in my signature...the author is far more eloquent than I. Bound Controls Are Evil and should be banished from the Earth.

and I still use them when listing data :p

peet: Bound Controls, to me, are what the FSO is to filburt!

I read the article.

I guess I am lucky in a few aspects:

1) I have never taken a class in programming.

2) My first experience with databases was with ASP, so I learned ADO from the start.

3) I discovered quickly that I could use ADO within VB and continued to use it there.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Hack
peet: Bound Controls, to me, are what the FSO is to filburt!

---

OK, what's wrong with the FSO and what should I be using instead?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Hack
peet: Bound Controls, to me, are what the FSO is to filburt!

---

thats why I use them both :D

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Lord_Rat


OK, what's wrong with the FSO and what should I be using instead?

---

nothing, just having fun with the turtle :)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Lord_Rat
OK, what's wrong with the FSO and what should I be using instead?

---

A lot of baggage comes with the File System Object that need not be loaded onto the end users machine. I've yet to see something the File System Object can do, that you can't do with regular VB code.

(Although, I'm NOT as rabid an FSO detractor as filburt. But, he does make good points. My "pet peeve", more than the FSO, is bound controls.)

Fear The Turtle!

I need help with the following then:

Creating a collection of drives that can be iterated using For Each

Getting the path , long- and short- file names of arbitrary files

and getting the UNC for a mapped network drive.

If I can figure this all out not using the FSO, I'll gladly write myself a module to replace the FSO, but I haven't figured these out yet.

As a side note, if you are using ASP and attempting to read files on the server, I'm pretty certain you HAVE to use FSO.

If you are writing ASP code, you are totally correct about the FSO Lord_Rat. Not even filburt could argue with that! :)

ah.. common guys.. nothing wrong in using FSO and noone fear the turtle :p

hmmm alot of people talk about FSO like if it takes up all the diskspace in the world...

scrrun.dll is 150 kB

and its dependencies are MSVCRT.DLL (that are normally on a win pc) 290kB

I could not find anything else in the dep file...

is there more ?

I can't argue with that peet. As I said, I don't have the "hard on" for the FSO that filburt does. Hell, I occassionally use it myself. My only point is that it does/can add an unnecessary amount of overhead.

Its not like it is in the same category as bound (spit) controls. :D

:D

well I was just courious regarding the actual baggage factor, I did not find any more dependencies, and I don't think that the msvcrt has any...

I thought I'd make u curious, and that way u would go figure it out.... I know u like to dig up information :D

Cool :) I think I'll keep using it.

I'm not that big about space when it comes to a one time downloaded program either. If we were transmitting data every time someone used the program, I'd be all over it like a fly on a horse.

But we aren't and so I'm not.