I want to migrate 1 of the utilities of my application to another platform. I found LiveCode programming lang. which claims to easily convert VFP Code into LiveCode. I don't have much knowledge of that. Another option open for me is .net . Which would be better option to opt?
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 derfloh on being selected by the Tek-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Migration 1 module of my application in vfp - Which is better .net or LiveCode
- Thread starter KALP1
- Start date
Olaf Doschke
Programmer
Never heard of LiveCode. Even if that is working nice right now, why bet on another outsider?
Bye, Olaf.
Edit: I read the wikipeadia article about LiveCode and congratulate on Macworld Annual Editor's Choice Award for "Best Development Software" in 2004. Funny, as Mac Development rather is open source (LAMP stack and all surrounding things) or XCode (Apples IDE comparing to Microsofts Visual Studio). You also often hear about Filemaker as an Access like database.
The language concept of Livecode sounds like it will be a shallow learning curve for someone programming VFP, but the concept of a programming language equal to english always causes a discomfort to me. Such english seeming sentences make code easy to read, but give the impression you can write commands like sentences. You only get the feeling of understanding the language immediately and still have to learn what parts are key words, options etc. I already dislike VFPs commands with their keywords you may put in different order, which in some ways will sound like "natural" language and in other order will just sound crappy.
The range of platfotms supported sounds nice. But the first question should be about how wide spread is the use, how good is it maintained and will it stay or disappear faster than it appeared. I won't judge the invisibility of the language as bad sign, VFP also was very invisible to the usual developer only knowing the most famous development tools and languages. But it's not a natural only such languages can replace VFP. If you have a task to reimplement, many times those general purpose langauges can also do them. It's a bit like leaving parents, or letting your kids leave home, but it's unavoidable.
From one persepctive VFP not being replacable in every aspect by those major languages must be true: Since no C,C++,C# nor Java nor MS Access nor PHP/Python or JS are really like VFP, a VFP similar language must be something less known, but since such core famous languages are so central in todays industry, why refuse to learn them? You don't only have to be concerned about reusing your codebase, you can do that within VFP. You have to be concerned about getting projects and that mainly will mean to maintain things written on those famous languages than in anything even just remotely using similar concepts as VFP.
Bye, Olaf.
Edit: I read the wikipeadia article about LiveCode and congratulate on Macworld Annual Editor's Choice Award for "Best Development Software" in 2004. Funny, as Mac Development rather is open source (LAMP stack and all surrounding things) or XCode (Apples IDE comparing to Microsofts Visual Studio). You also often hear about Filemaker as an Access like database.
The language concept of Livecode sounds like it will be a shallow learning curve for someone programming VFP, but the concept of a programming language equal to english always causes a discomfort to me. Such english seeming sentences make code easy to read, but give the impression you can write commands like sentences. You only get the feeling of understanding the language immediately and still have to learn what parts are key words, options etc. I already dislike VFPs commands with their keywords you may put in different order, which in some ways will sound like "natural" language and in other order will just sound crappy.
The range of platfotms supported sounds nice. But the first question should be about how wide spread is the use, how good is it maintained and will it stay or disappear faster than it appeared. I won't judge the invisibility of the language as bad sign, VFP also was very invisible to the usual developer only knowing the most famous development tools and languages. But it's not a natural only such languages can replace VFP. If you have a task to reimplement, many times those general purpose langauges can also do them. It's a bit like leaving parents, or letting your kids leave home, but it's unavoidable.
From one persepctive VFP not being replacable in every aspect by those major languages must be true: Since no C,C++,C# nor Java nor MS Access nor PHP/Python or JS are really like VFP, a VFP similar language must be something less known, but since such core famous languages are so central in todays industry, why refuse to learn them? You don't only have to be concerned about reusing your codebase, you can do that within VFP. You have to be concerned about getting projects and that mainly will mean to maintain things written on those famous languages than in anything even just remotely using similar concepts as VFP.
Olaf Doschke
Programmer
Besides, what topic is your module about? What is its UI, what is its major input and output? What does it need to interact and interoperate with?
Even the major most used general purpose languages have different strengths and what language you choose to rebuild one module will need to take that into account. I would even dare to say use the best language for the purpose of each module, but you could end up using 6 languages for 5 modules.
Of course one of the major reasons general purpose programming languages are as successful as general purpose cpus is, you don't want to juggle too many balls at once.´with too many specialist languages.
Bye, Olaf.
Even the major most used general purpose languages have different strengths and what language you choose to rebuild one module will need to take that into account. I would even dare to say use the best language for the purpose of each module, but you could end up using 6 languages for 5 modules.
Of course one of the major reasons general purpose programming languages are as successful as general purpose cpus is, you don't want to juggle too many balls at once.´with too many specialist languages.
Bye, Olaf.
- Status
Similar threads