Welcome to the Lounge

Luigi Esposito13-May-15 5:06

Luigi Esposito

13-May-15 5:06

You perfectly described what is happening in my company Smile | :)

.
Just for clarify we are speaking about a large software written in PowerBuilder that need to be migrated the soonest (SAP, the new Sybase owner, decided to give PowerBuilder development to external company ... we are getting too much worries from these news)

Thanks for your feedback

jschell13-May-15 8:49

jschell

13-May-15 8:49

hug.login wrote:
(this will change!!).

This sort of abstraction attempts is not new. And they will not ever support "fancy" because that sort of thing is often new and at best (idealized best) the abstraction layer must play catch up to every single one.

hug.login wrote:
Business don't want to wait and spend the money for a beautiful implemented C# algorithm,

Business doesn't want to wait nor pay for anything.

But what happens is that some businesses will make the mistake of buying into the sales pitch and one of three things will happen...

They will realize almost immediately that it can't do some critical bit of functionality, something that the company probably already had. And to implement it, if possible at all would require a large scale effort (months) of effort. (And of course the transition period doesn't allow for new features either.)
They will end up giving up after a short period of time and redoing their entire development because the abstraction layer never does deliver on its promise.
They end up tied to the proprietary product for years producing a product that looks 'clunky' compared to the competitors because it never has and probably never had the cool stuff. And suffer from hiring because the pool of 'senior' users of the proprietary products is so small.

Marc Greiner at home13-May-15 1:52

Marc Greiner at home

13-May-15 1:52

Hi Luigi,

DevExpress XAF is the only right answer for "low code development".
The XAF framework is built on top of award winning controls (grid, tree, ribbon, navigation, dropdown, etc.).

I have been programming since 30+ years (C, C++, Borland, Delphi, VB6, MFC, SQL, html, aspx, javascript, etc.) and have seen or heard from many "Frameworks", but there is always a limitation somewhere.

There is however no limitation with DevExpress XAF:
- WinForm AND Web, at the same time, from the same code.
- Based on top of award winning components, every year.
- Visual Studio + C# (or VB), absolute full control through code over every aspect of the application, if necessary.
- You describe your data model through code or visually in a class designer: Class, properties, aggregated lists (relations) or not.
- XAF does the rest:
* Builds or updates the database, be it MSSQL, Oracle, etc.
* Prepares views for you: List views, detail views, Lookup views, that you can link to an "Outlook" navigation.
* Gives access to CRUD operations via standard toolbar buttons (fully customizable).
- If necessary, you add you own views or navigation items, dashboards with graphics, gauges, etc., buttons/actions where you want, mainly by describing what you need, with only a few lines of code here and there.
- XAF has all standard features that a business application requires, under others: active directory login or standard authentication, user authorization, validation, appearance, auditing, pivot, localization, etc. everything is so easy and well designed, ready to be used mostly by describing what you need.

I am using this XAF framework intensively since December 2014, and each day, I feel like sending to the DevExpress developers the caviar and the Champagne that they deserve for having build such a marvelous and unique tool. I assure you that it is not possible to build a framework that can do more that this one, simply because it has all what you need, implemented in the most logical, elegant and intuitive way, on the best development platform there is today, namely .NET, Visual Studio and C#.

Some links to mind blowing demos:
Amanda building a small XAF business application in 10 minutes[^]
Seth showing XAF in depth (1h 10mn video that highlights many basic features of XAF)[^]

Some articles about XAF here at code project:
Getting the Job Done with XAF[^]
Using Domain Components (DC) in XAF[^]
Dungeons of XAF and Magic[^]

Download the full XAF framework (one month trial), including their award winning controls
DevExpress[^]

Disclaimer: I am not a DevExpress employee. I use their control set daily in my daytime job as an employee of a small software shop and as a hobbyist at night. The DevExpress tools, including XAF, help me every day to solve my business cases.

Peter.Od13-May-15 9:46

Peter.Od

13-May-15 9:46

It comes down to the-right-tool-for-the-job. I've used Pascal, C, C++, C#, Smalltalk and 4GL frameworks such as Clarion, Dataflex... Also entry-level systems such as MS Access. I've reviewed and use several of the BPM (Business Process Modeling) solutions.

Today, I can do anything I want with C# and .NET. I can do it 3x faster with Smalltalk, if I want to develop highly customized solutions.

I can do a quick-and-dirty database, list and reporting app with Access. This is ok if you want to train the users and limit the number of deployments. Access is an upgrade from using Excel spreadsheets. Access apps are obsolete every time Microsoft introduces their next version of MS-Office.

Some of the BPM systems are highly productive with business process flow and integrating with legacy systems. But, you can't really build highly customized apps or mobile or web solutions without conforming to their limitations.

I took a look at the DevExpress XAF website and some of their videos. It looks great for a .NET shop and in-house apps. I don't think it's appropriate for building public scale apps that may be used by thousands of users via the Internet. For that, a solution like Meteor is better.

I conclude with "use-the-right-tool-for-the-job." With software, if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problems looks like a nail. There is no one framework for all projects.

Another issue to consider, if you do use a framework or system such as DevExpress XAF, make sure you have all the source code so you don't go down in flames if the vendor goes of in a direction not compatible with your objectives, or goes out of business.

We built an ecommerce system for large scale deployments using IBM Visual Age Smalltalk. To this day, we can easily support the system and upgrade to the latest SOAP or REST or ??? features with minimal time, cost and pain. IBM sold this development tool to Instantiations so support and upgrades continue. All the source code to the entire development environment is included. Our experience with Microsoft development tools and platforms is a lot of pain and re-development every time MS jumps to a new paradigm and makes the old obsolete.

I believe programmers are more productive today, but I can't see the need for good developers going away soon. The bigger challenge is the cheap developers over-seas that we have to compete with, if we're based in 1st world countries.

RafagaX13-May-15 12:32

RafagaX

13-May-15 12:32

Wait until they do a major upgrade, and then let me know how much love you still have for them... Poke tongue | ;-P

CEO at:
- Rafaga Systems
- Para Facturas
- Modern Components
for the moment...

Thornik13-May-15 2:11

Thornik

13-May-15 2:11

You're spreading TOO common words for your kind of development. Just say "we use narrow, proprietary platform to make software - please say us again 'we're hooked on their platform!'". You wanna that?

Kirk 1038982113-May-15 2:56

Kirk 10389821

13-May-15 2:56

Let me take a stab at the business decision making process.
(Because when I got started in the 80's, I was told "don't bother" the 4GL tools are so good,
there won't be ANY programming jobs in a decade!" ROTFLMAO)

1) You see this budget for programmers... It is all for "coding"
2) If you had a solution like... X... You could do you're own reports, etc. etc. etc.
3) See that, you don't need to do coding, so you can cut the programmers and SAVE MONEY
...
4) Oh, it takes a LITTLE configuration (eh, a lot like programming), and it has a 3-5 year break even.

To which I say "RUN".
Honestly, someone has to get to the WHY of this decision. Because if it went the above way, they need help. I will gladly warn your management to NOT DO IT.

"low code" appears to be buzz for "very little programming required"... Just configuration.

Which is wonderful... Until you have to do something SPECIFIC... Or worse, beyond the tools ability, design or intent.

For the record, I am not against moving forward. I am replacing an 14 year old system as I type.
But all of that functionality takes a long time to understand, re-envision, and to implement and test. And if it runs your business... What is the worse that could happen? (and we have seen it happen).

Robert g Blair13-May-15 14:11

Robert g Blair

13-May-15 14:11

OK, I started coding around 1979 in Basic on a TRS-80.

I distinctly remember a magazine cover from back then, with a headline like "The End of Coding!".
The lead story was about a tool that would "write your code for you".
You just tell it your requirements, and voila! - a bug-free program is created.

Since then I have watched a never-ending cavalcade of "no more coding" fads march on and off the stage. Clipper, Cognos, Progress, Lansa, Borland ObjectVision, etc.

They are always highly popular with corporate types who salivate at the thought of sacking all those expensive programmers down in IT.

And a war story:

The mid-eighties. I attend a Dec-VAX user group meeting where the highlight is the conversion of an electric utility companies COBOL billing program to COGNOS.

The developer proudly displays the fanfold listing of the COGNOS code, versus the fanfold listing of the COBOL code. The COGNOS listing is about three times thicker.
He says that, currently, the COGNOS program takes more than 16 hours to run, which is NFG, because meter readings flow in constantly. The COBOL program can process a single days billings (meter readings) in 3 hours, which works fine for overnight batch processing.
But he is confident they can optimise the COGNOS program run-times to be "nearly as fast" as the COBOL program.

Later we hear that the IT Director got emergency approval for a Mega-buck or so of new DEC VAX systems to solve the run-time problem for the COGNOS program.

Then we hear that it still won't run overnight, and that the IT Director has asked the board for more money for more VAX'es.

Finally, we hear the IT Director is sacked, and the COGNOS code is ditched.

The IT Director? A week later was Regional Sales Manager for DEC.

I am so impressed again

HobbyProggy11-May-15 21:29

11-May-15 21:29

I mean, they progress so fast now HoloLens / Occulus and this time The Void
Star Trek[^] incomming (Not so holo but quite good).

SFW

if(this.signature != "")
{
    MessageBox.Show("This is my signature: " + Environment.NewLine + signature);
}
else
{
    MessageBox.Show("404-Signature not found");
}

CDP180211-May-15 21:41

11-May-15 21:41

Just join an army of your choice and you will get the most realistic experience. They provide all the equipment and even pay you some money. Big bonus if you ask that screaming drill sarge how you can skip the tutorial.

The language is JavaScript. that of Mordor, which I will not utter here

This is Javascript. If you put big wheels and a racing stripe on a golf cart, it's still a f***ing golf cart.

"I don't know, extraterrestrial?"
"You mean like from space?"
"No, from Canada."

If software development were a circus, we would all be the clowns.

HobbyProggy11-May-15 21:51

11-May-15 21:51

Yeah sure

It's not about the fighting it's about the idea and technique Cool | :cool:

if(this.signature != "")
{
    MessageBox.Show("This is my signature: " + Environment.NewLine + signature);
}
else
{
    MessageBox.Show("404-Signature not found");
}

CDP180211-May-15 21:56

11-May-15 21:56

Nothing beats real sand between your teeth, the smell of the powder and actual recoil from your rifle.

OriginalGriff11-May-15 21:58

OriginalGriff

11-May-15 21:58

Or the opposition bullets thudding into your soft flesh...finding a health pack isn't gonna fix this! Laugh | :laugh:

Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...

HobbyProggy11-May-15 22:00

11-May-15 22:00

OriginalGriff wrote:
finding a health pack isn't gonna fix this!

No need for, today you get red eyes and everything's fine as long as no one shoots at you for 10 seconds. Then your good to go again XD

if(this.signature != "")
{
    MessageBox.Show("This is my signature: " + Environment.NewLine + signature);
}
else
{
    MessageBox.Show("404-Signature not found");
}

CDP180211-May-15 23:27

11-May-15 23:27

Did the sarge not say something about keeping your a.... ehem rear parts down?

OriginalGriff11-May-15 23:44

OriginalGriff

11-May-15 23:44

I was running away at the time!

Sorry, sorry - I was making a tactical retreat in order to summon reinforcements.

Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...

CDP180211-May-15 23:45

11-May-15 23:45

Sorry, I did not know that you are from France...

HobbyProggy11-May-15 21:59

11-May-15 21:59

I see, you are no child anymore, you lost the fun on playing?
Btw, Reenactment of war in 1810 does that job for me, those guns had recoil. Todays weapons are smooth Big Grin | :-D

if(this.signature != "")
{
    MessageBox.Show("This is my signature: " + Environment.NewLine + signature);
}
else
{
    MessageBox.Show("404-Signature not found");
}

CDP180211-May-15 23:25

11-May-15 23:25

HobbyProggy wrote:
those guns had recoil

At a rate of about four or five shots per hour you better use a bowling ball as a bullet and about a pound of powder behind it Smile | :)

HobbyProggy11-May-15 23:32

11-May-15 23:32

CDP1802 wrote:
four ~~or five~~ shots per ~~hour~~ minute

FTFY

No seriously, i like shooting modern weapons but the recoil of those old beasts is tough.
And btw, if war would be fought online, we'd have less coffins to fill and could use the money spared somewhere else, where it's truely needed.

if(this.signature != "")
{
    MessageBox.Show("This is my signature: " + Environment.NewLine + signature);
}
else
{
    MessageBox.Show("404-Signature not found");
}

CDP180211-May-15 23:39

11-May-15 23:39

Look to any online game and how the players accuse each other of cheating. Would anyone accept the results of your online war? Would anybody (except France) surrender after being defeated online?

HobbyProggy11-May-15 23:58