Hi, It depends what you mean by shell.
IMO any "generic" function (methods, UI's) can be considered (may be part of) a shell. Ideally as a component, so it can be easily moved from one application to the other. Example: a method that puts a CSV file into a 2D Array. Or a type ahead component (as an alternative to popups or combo boxes). Or the progress bar component provided by 4D. The basic idea: do not invent the wheel each time, create reusable modules instead; save time - nothing new. The data browser component for example. It is a component and uses a few of the functions of the utility component. The utility component itself can be used in any host database and offers more than 200 generic methods. Most of them are very basic, some are more sophisticated. My current personal favorite: Uty_PrintListBox (well, could be improved, but anyway). The data browser component could be used as a "classic" shell. It contains a relatively powerful set of features to "browse" a database: search, sort, save selections (as sets), UI based set operators, cross database navigation, import/export functions, user based save of settings as JSON file (displayed tables and fields, column width, sorted field, sort order, input form per table etc.) and it also includes a sample of a generic subform that can be implemented on an input form, that allows to move from one record to the other (first, previous, next, last). I would not want to start a new project (or take over an existing one) without my components. To answer your question: IMO, the idea of a shell (or generic, reusable functions) is still alive and relevant. BTW: I published the latest version of the data browser (including utility component) today: https://www.asuswebstorage.com/navigate/s/AC4441C0C5384321AEB93A76C764FCD8W As always: free and source (both components) included. Best, Olivier -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: 4D_Tech [mailto:4d_tech-boun...@lists.4d.com] Im Auftrag von Robert ListMail Gesendet: Mittwoch, 31. August 2016 21:30 An: 4D iNug Tech <4d_tech@lists.4d.com> Betreff: 4D Shell or not so much...? It was recently suggested to me that the value of using a 4D-based shell is less important now… and that I should consider new 4D applications from scratch. I’ve created more apps with a shell than without with great success—that is, I’ve been a shell guy for the most part snd i do see the value. With that said, I was trying to find the private email from those that suggested, and recognized value, with the non-shell approach. Thoughts about new v15-based 4D projects via a shell or not? Why is a shell less relevant today? ********************************************************************** 4D Internet Users Group (4D iNUG) FAQ: http://lists.4d.com/faqnug.html Archive: http://lists.4d.com/archives.html Options: http://lists.4d.com/mailman/options/4d_tech Unsub: mailto:4d_tech-unsubscr...@lists.4d.com **********************************************************************
