With all due respect to Access, what I have notice from people who have
been coding in Access for a long time (5 or more years) the coding
becomes more sophisticated and it becomes harder to manage this code in
Access because Access is a fairly high level programming environment -
high level as in you can only tweak Access so much (as opposed to OOP
where you can tweak base procedures to your hearts content). It is kind
of like you can only manipulate a wizard so far. When it starts to act
in ways that you can't control - it is because you can't get down low
enough under the hood to do so. I guess for those people who must be
able to change the base behaviors of Access there is probably API code
(or for those people who are gurus of low level programming - can write
their own API code - but then you get into the Re-Inventing the wheel
syndrom - if a person is that good, they probably won't waste their
time).
I have been coding in Access for over 10 years now, and I have been
migrating more and more projects to the .Net environment because even
though the OOP learning curve is a little steeper than VBA, once you get
the hang of it, it is much easier to control stuff because you are at a
much lower level coding. Kind of like if you build a house with
pre-fabricated parts, you can only tweak those pre-fabricated parts so
much. If you can build the parts yourself, they are much easier to
customize.
So, on the subject of subforms, for the level of sophistication you are
describing, I would consider migrating to VB2005 and use a datagridview.
For example, to change datasources in a subform you must have
pre-existing fields for each datasource. In a datagridview (VB2005)
whatever you set the datasource to is how many columns/fields you are
going to get. In recent times I have had serious heartaches with
subform (against sql server tables).
So my suggestion is to look at the operation you are working on and
evaluate the tools you are using. For more sophisticated operations you
need more sophisticated tools.
Rich
*** Sent via Developersdex
http://www.developersdex.com ***