At 05:13 PM 9/5/2008 -0700, Michael Madigan wrote: >Well I use direct table access and since Windows 98, we've never has any >corruption. It seems all corruption in the past has all been related to >hardware.
... Yep yep. I imagine it's not quite so fragile as people tend to think. But usually all it takes is to get bitten once and then everyone claims the sky is falling. Hmmm... but they don't do the same thing when SQL Server fails or an IE security hole trashes their system. Strange. <shrug> Anyway, I've found the non-direct table access turns out to be handy in other situations. E.g. the single record stuff - SCATTER...NAME.... because then you're got an object you can pass around. It makes it easier to create encapsulated code with high cohesion and low coupling, IMO. -Charlie >--- On Fri, 9/5/08, Charlie Coleman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > From: Charlie Coleman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > I never use Views because I can't see/control all the > > details of what is > > going on under the hood. But I do agree that direct table > > access is not > > advised. Even when editing a single record I use the > > SCATTER MEMO NAME ... > > approach. Maybe this is why I've never had problems > > with VFP DB corruption > > but others have <shrug> and it's certainly why > > I've never had the problems > > with Views that others have had. > > > > -Charlie _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
