I developed a couple of applications in Access 2(!) long time ago. Now I'm back with Access 2003. I'm looking for an example application, it doesn't have to be big but what I'm after is good robust error handling, it should be programmed so it could be released to a client. I just want to be able to look at the code and how everything is set up. I left Access 2 for VB and sometimes I feel a little confused about mixing built-in Access function with traditional VB code. First I wanted to everything unbound but I realize it's impossible and not the way it should be built. That's why I'd love to get my hands on a really good developed Access application. Anyone know where I can download one?
Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations TouchToneTommy on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Example application
- Thread starter Rauken
- Start date
>...what I'm after is good robust error handling...
Google on "Access error handling" and you will probably get many error handling code samples, downloads, articles, and such.
>First I wanted to everything unbound but I realize it's >impossible and not the way it should be built....
I think ubound forms are actually the way to go, and the way it *should* be built. At least for single table editing. It requires more development time, of course, but it has many advantages....more flexible, more customized forms, less file corruption, easier for users to understand, and etc. It's amazing how much trouble users have understanding how the record selector is used. But if using subforms, then yes, a bound form seems to be better simply for making editing on both forms standardized. But your preference still surprises me since I believe VB doesn't use subforms, right?
Regards,
Mike Dorthick
Google on "Access error handling" and you will probably get many error handling code samples, downloads, articles, and such.
>First I wanted to everything unbound but I realize it's >impossible and not the way it should be built....
I think ubound forms are actually the way to go, and the way it *should* be built. At least for single table editing. It requires more development time, of course, but it has many advantages....more flexible, more customized forms, less file corruption, easier for users to understand, and etc. It's amazing how much trouble users have understanding how the record selector is used. But if using subforms, then yes, a bound form seems to be better simply for making editing on both forms standardized. But your preference still surprises me since I believe VB doesn't use subforms, right?
Regards,
Mike Dorthick
- Thread starter
- #3
No VB does not have subform but I really don't miss it. I haven't had the need to use databound subforms in my application.
I think some Access gurus might disagree with us on the unbound issue. I had a conversation on the MS Access Newsgroup and two Access MVP tried to convince me of not using unbound forms. They said the benefits were less code with bound forms. I don't mind coding if I get total control over my application. I really miss a lot of features in the Access standard form controls compared to VB.
I think some Access gurus might disagree with us on the unbound issue. I had a conversation on the MS Access Newsgroup and two Access MVP tried to convince me of not using unbound forms. They said the benefits were less code with bound forms. I don't mind coding if I get total control over my application. I really miss a lot of features in the Access standard form controls compared to VB.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question