superfluous practices (Discuss)

[Nightwalker83]

Hi,

All of us here being interested in I.T. because of work, hobby, etc must wonder why there seem to be some superfluous functions, etc in newer versions of software, etc when the older version seemed to carryout what the new function appears to do without all the extra crap.

Now I am sure many of you have your own examples but here is one that I have encounter while studying web design! In 2004 Macromedia released Dream Weaver 2004 MX. To create Flash Buttons was simple using the built-in function via the menu in the program. Back then it also did not output an external file to accompany the button/s.

However, in 2007/2008 with CS3/CS4 whenever, you create a flash button now it is done using the same method above except for one difference. You get an external ".js" javascript file that some how interacts with the buttons. Yet when you open it up there is nothing that is referencing buttons you just created.

What other obsolete practices have you encountered and why do you consider them superfluous?


Nightwalker

[RhinoBull]

Obsolescences in software development imho are often necessary things helping to maintain compatibility.
It especially "useful" when during conversions to newest environment.
Remember, when you try to convert project developed in VS2003 to 2005 or 2008 IDE advises you of any obsolescence encounters and suggests what the new name should be.
I haven't worked with Dream Weaver, however in general there should be little difference - just some IDEs have more intelligence then others.

[dilettante]

I'm confused. Obsolete means no longer valuable or needed, as in becoming superfluous or being replaced by something different.

It sounds more like you're talking about new products regressing in some way.

[RhinoBull]

It sounds more like you're talking about new products regressing in some way.

Not necessary. Since this is manly VB related board here is an example of obsolescence:
- there is a Call keyword
- can it still be used? Yes.
- is it obsolete? Yes.

Like I said different enviroments are "trained" to handle obsolescence in a different manner.
In VB 2005/2008 you won't be allowed to use obsolete method - IDE will popup dialog advising to replace it with latest and greatest.

[dee-u]

Not necessary. Since this is manly VB related board here is an example of obsolescence:
- there is a Call keyword
- can it still be used? Yes.
- is it obsolete? Yes.

Like I said different enviroments are "trained" to handle obsolescence in a different manner.
In VB 2005/2008 you won't be allowed to use obsolete method - IDE will popup dialog advising to replace it with latest and greatest.

Haven't seen that in 2005, I think the obsolete methods will be added as Warnings so you can still use them at your discretion.

[Nightwalker83]

Obsolescences in software development imho are often necessary things helping to maintain compatibility.

However, using the example I posted above the external javascript file had nothing to do with Dream Weaver itself. The external script was for use with the flash players to tell them code to display the flash.

If the additional file has nothing to do with the product you are creating or the program you are creating it with then surely it is obsolete?

[RhinoBull]

I don't think I understand what you're talking about. Sorry.

[RhinoBull]

Haven't seen that in 2005, I think the obsolete methods will be added as Warnings so you can still use them at your discretion.

Try using code written in framework 1.0 or 1.1 in 2005 or 2008 IDE then.

[penagate]

If the additional file has nothing to do with the product you are creating or the program you are creating it with then surely it is obsolete?

Perhaps the word you are looking for is 'superfluous', rather than obsolete?

I must admit I am having difficulty following this thread as well.

[Nightwalker83]

Perhaps the word you are looking for is 'superfluous', rather than obsolete?

Oops! Yes, that is the word I'm after! I have changed the thread title.

Edit:

I don't think I understand what you're talking about. Sorry.

What I'm talking about is why add files to a program or project that have nothing to do with the creation of that program or project in the first place?

[DeanMc]

Like needing the whole .NET framework as opposed to only the parts you have used?

[RhinoBull]

What I'm talking about is why add files to a program or project that have nothing to do with the creation of that program or project in the first place?

That's for the time being... You may already have few idea for future releases so you may want to get ready.

[Nightwalker83]

That's for the time being... You may already have few idea for future releases so you may want to get ready.

No! I think you misunderstand. I'm not sure how to explain it in terms of Visual Basic or C++. I suppose in terms of programing it would be like compiling your code then finding out that that VB or C++ has already created a dep file even though you are going to create a setup package.

Like needing the whole .NET framework as opposed to only the parts you have used?

More like changing the older code to something newer but the newer code looks as if it has nothing to do with the current product.

[dee-u]

If the older code has something to do with the product and you convert it to something newer then it should follow that the newer code has something to do with the current project.

[Nightwalker83]

If the older code has something to do with the product and you convert it to something newer then it should follow that the newer code has something to do with the current project.

Yeah, I know! However, sometimes the code doesn't refer back to the code you create but the program that is used by a external program to help run the program/web site you create. Take for example: AC_RunActiveContent.js. It was not created by me but since I create flash buttons for use on my website Dream Weaver created the file to tell the flash player how to interact with the buttons.

[RhinoBull]

No! I think you misunderstand...

It could also be vise versa, right?

[penagate]

I think the gist of this thread is: Don't use Dreamweaver.

[Nightwalker83]

I think the gist of this thread is: Don't use Dreamweaver.

However, it is a problem with all programs! Sometimes the creators will change a feature of a program for the better but it won't be obvious why the new change is better.

[dee-u]

However, it is a problem with all programs! Sometimes the creators will change a feature of a program for the better but it won't be obvious why the new change is better.

You cannot generalize ALL programs. At times there could be others who cannot find the essence of a new feature/behaviour but not all.

[Nightwalker83]

You cannot generalize ALL programs. At times there could be others who cannot find the essence of a new feature/behaviour but not all.

That's true! I didn't realize I put the word all in my previous post. However, a number of programs has this feature and it doesn't seem make a difference to what the program did before.

[dee-u]

There should be a reason for everything, and with the situation at hand you may not have found yet the reason why it behaves that way, it may not be necessarily useless.

[DeanMc]

But to be fair most of the time it is useless.

[RhinoBull]

But to be fair most of the time it is useless.

But not always - that's what counts after all. What may seemed useless to you may not be for developer/architect - god only knows what they had in their minds.