Re: Open source alternative for MsAccess?

From: David W. Fenton (dXXXfenton_at_bway.net.invalid)
Date: 06/16/04 

Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2004 22:07:47 GMT

Bernd Bollman <bernd@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:can5q3$e7o$07$1@news.t-online.com:

> David W. Fenton wrote:
>> Bernd Bollman <bernd@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> > [...Microsoft Access...] For a new user
>> > with prior experience in other better designed systems it
>> > appears completely nonsensical.
>>
>> Please name some better-designed systems
>
> C, C++, Java and lots more.

These are not RAD database application development systems that can
also be used as an end-user tool.

The design reflects the purpose of the product. Comparing designs of
products with entirely different purposes is completely fruitless.
You wouldn't fault the design of a BMW convertible because it lacks
the horsepower of a Mack truck.

Unless you're an idiot.

>> that are the same kinds of
>> tools:
>
> I've already stated that I respect the fact that Access provides
> some unique features and is of great value to the few who happen
> to know it well enough. I did not say that there are better
> alternatives. All I said was that its design is total
> bullshit . . .

And yet, you can't give a single example of the "bullshit design"
that holds up under any scrutiny whatsoever.

> . . . and
> its a pain having to work with it and adapt to its confusing inner
> workings . . .

This is how I feel about Linux.

> . . . _if_ you have had prior experience in a well designed
> programming environment . . .

I know a number of programmers who have wide experience in a number
of development platforms who have found using Access really easy.
Maybe that's because they left their baggage at the door and took
Access for what it is, instead of trying to make it be like the
platforms they are experienced with.

> . . . _and_ you are able to recognize and
> appreciate the beautifulness of good structure and desgin if you
> face it.

Thanks for the thinly veiled insult.

>> Visual Basic is bad-mouthed because anybody can write it.
>>
>> I have yet to see anyone provide any technical reasons why VB is
>> subpar in any area (including performance, BTW).
>
> I recommend you take a look at one of the aforementioned languages
> and it will open your eyes.

First, they are designed for completely different purposes.

D'oh.

So, they will have different architectures.

Second, VB is not VBA and VBA is not VBA as used in Access. VBA in
Access is used very specifically in its purpose as the programming
language for building database applications. In that context, it's
very easy to use and very efficient.

For the purpose it is designed to be used.

>> >> I'd like to know what about the documentation you see as
>> >> problematic.
>> >
>> > It reflects the (IMO) bad design and opaqueness.
>>
>> I don't see that, either, so you're just blowing hot air, so far
>> as I can see. If you can't provide specific examples to support
>> your assertions, then I feel safe disregarding them.
>
> I dont want to convince you, I was just stating my opinion. You
> can think whatever you want, I dont care.

Well, f all you're interested in is saying how awful Access is, then
 please, take comp.databases.ms-access out of the followups.

> But to not look like a stupid MS-bashing troll Ill show a view of
> how it appears to a new user wanting to learn VBA.
>
> Ok, I click "Help"->"Microsof Access help" (sorry if the entries
> are named different, Ill try my best translating correctly).
> "Programming in Visual Basic" looks good, "Microsoft Access Visual
> Basic Reference" too. . . .

Well, stop right there.

Why aren't you instead investigating the sample databases?

> . . . Im welcome with a graphical overview of the
> object hierarchy. So it looks like its an object-oriented
> language. Nice. Next come listings of SQL and VBA functions,
> "Whats new" and... Oh, "programming concepts" sounds like
> important basic information.

Except you're going at things completely backwards for a RAD
development tool. You should instead start by looking at the table,
form and report design features, where you can build basic objects
without writing code. *Then* you can extend those objects with code
that expands on the default behaviors of those objects.

> But what a disappointment. It starts right away with _extended_
> concepts, which in turn begins with a discussion of avoidance of
> name conflicts with modules, procedures and objects before these
> language elements are even briefly described. . . .

You started at the wrong end, asking "how do I program?" instead of
"how do I create a database application?"

> . . . But okay, its
> called "*extended* programming concepts". The following section
> has a funny name: "click on activex controls" :)
> Of course this and everything else under "programming concepts"
> serves no useful purpose for a beginning VBA programmer.

Well, your mental model of what the product is for is wrong. Hence,
you end up looking in the wrong places for Help.

> Next in the "Microsoft Visual Basic Reference" come alphabetical
> listings of objects, methods, attributes and events. If this
> section would be called "Microsoft Visual Basic Class-Hierarchy
> Reference" it would make much more sense because the language
> proper isnt even remotely touched.
>
> Further down in "Programming in Visual Basic" we have "Microsoft
> Office Visual Basic Reference" (which is also duplicated at the
> top level). Now whats the difference? From looking at it I cant
> tell and it also only provides the same useless object, method
> etc. listings as "MS A. VB Reference" does.
>
> The next point is "Visual Basic - Conceptional Topics". Its a
> collection of arbitrary but very interesting topics like scope
> and lifetime of variables. Sad I dont even know how to declare
> one (do I even _have_ to declare it?). Oh, after looking more
> closely at this alphabetically sorted (!) list I found "Declaring
> variables".
>
> Ok, apparently we have function local, and global variables
> which are declared by using "Dim <var> As <type>". "Public"
> instead of "Dim" in global declarations provides us with
> variables that can be used across modules. Now an overview of
> all available types and declaring multiples variables in a single
> statement. If we leave out the type it defaults to "Variant".
>
> [experienced programmer stops and thinks for a while about how
> the compiler (or interpreter? dont know...) handles variables
> that can hold objects of any type and to what code constructs
> this could possibly lead]

Late binding vs. early binding. I'm not sure that's covered in the
help file, which always gives examples using early binding, so far
as I can tell.

This is an advanced question that has very little to do with the
task of building database applications.

It's a programmer's question, instead.

> We also have module local variables by using "Private" instead
> of "Dim". Oh, its essentially the same! Now one of them is clearly
> superfluous, isnt it? We can also use "Static" instead of "Dim"
> to get variables that keep their value between calls. Huh? I can
> call a module?
>
> What comes next will scare away any serious hacker if he has
> managed to get to this point at all. Variables are implicitely
> declared by just using it in a statement (...) and you can even
> completely change the meaning of the code by using "Option
> Explicit". So there seem to be practically two fundamentally
> different syntaxes with the same name - VBA.

No, there's two different ways of using it, with Option Explicit,
which requires variable declaration (the default until Access 2000,
when MS stupidly sacrificed the features of the Access VBA editor in
order to make it work the same as the VBE (Environment) used in
other MS Office programs; in other words, they made the IDE for the
most advanced of their products like the simplified IDE that is used
in their less advanced products; yes, we probably agree this was a
really stupid decision; in the next version of Access, they changed
the default back to using Option Explicit), and without it.

The default in Word and Excel macros is to not require explicit
variable declaration. VBScript works this way, too.

My first db language was Paradox's PAL, and it worked that way, too.
That's why I was thrilled when I started using Access that I could
make sure that my code required variable declaration.

> I will stop here, I think its enough. This was just a single
> section and it goes on like this. I still dont know how the
> input text is separated into tokens (if it is at all) and what
> are the lexical elements of the language. Can it even be
> represented by some formal syntax description language?
> And concerning the documentation - its just totally confusing
> and very hard to find anything.

Why do you care about these things at this point?

You're asking entirely the wrong question.

It's like taking a manual for a radio and trying to figure out from
it how the batteries work, instead of wanting to figure out how to
play some tunes.

>> >> Nonetheless, I'll take my "opaque monolithic
>> >> Monster-Bloatware" over any of the alternatives any day.
>> >>
>> >> And I'll probably be able to finish the same project in 1/2 or
>> >> less the time it would take anyone working on any competing
>> >> platform.
>> >
>> > May very well be. I would never in my life touch Access again.
>>
>> Your choice, but that choice mostly seems to based on your own
>> ignorance of how to use the tool more than it is on any actual
>> deficiencies in Access, which you seem able to identify in
>> general, but not in the specific.
>
> I hope I've made my point clear now. . ..

You've made it abundantly clear that you have little comprehension
of what a tool like Access was created to accomplish.

> . . . And I hope you appreciate
> my efforts. You probably dont know how hard it was for me to
> start a Windows system, use it, navigate the Access help and
> restrain from using animal language in my posting while describing
> my experience :)

Well, have some sympathy for those who try to use Linux, which has a
different set of metaphors and paradigms and has documentation that
seems to me to be written for people who already know the answers. 

-- 
David W. Fenton                        http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
dfenton at bway dot net                http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc

Relevant Pages

  • RE: "Module" option does not show up when setting permissions.
    ... It's by design. ... Access 2000 introduced the separate VBA ... Project for handling the code (notice the separate code window (VB Editor) ... an MDE database file out of it if you want to hide the source code from ...
    (microsoft.public.access.security)
  • Re: GUI for access application
    ... Can I do this in VBA? ... though it won't be easy unless you are familiar with database ... design, user interface design, VBA and SQL. ... tremendously powerful data-aware forms and controls built in. ...
    (microsoft.public.access.gettingstarted)
  • Re: Phantom debug break points in MS Access VBA code.
    ... This often happens when you edit code while the form or object is "running" ... go to that module (if it's a regular module, open that module in design ... Compact/Repair the database. ... Since then this colleague keeps reporting that VBA *stops* at this ...
    (microsoft.public.access.macros)
  • Re: How do I create an Excel database?
    ... It can be argued that the proper place for a database is database management ... It is important to design a spreadsheet not just type everything in. ... On the output side I can't comment as I don't know the purpose to which data ...
    (microsoft.public.excel.newusers)
  • RE: Cannot open forms in Access 2007
    ... Go to the VBA ... In the menubar within the vba editor you should see the ... Have tried converting the database in 2007 a few times but still nothing. ... either in normal view or design. ...
    (microsoft.public.access.forms)