DataBinding

[Dennis]

I have tried using Databinding for my application but always seem to find it
very restrictive (maybe I don't completely understand it enough). I always
seem to find it much easier to display a form, have the user fill it out then
put the data into a class representing a data row and then use the OLEadaptor
or OLECommands to update the database.

My question is has anyone really used databinding in anything but the
simpliest application that will be used for commercial purposes?

--
Dennis in Houston

[david]

On 2005-09-18, Dennis <De****@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

I have tried using Databinding for my application but always seem to find it
very restrictive (maybe I don't completely understand it enough).
First, I assume we're talking WinForms here...
I always
seem to find it much easier to display a form, have the user fill it out then
put the data into a class representing a data row and then use the OLEadaptor
or OLECommands to update the database.

My question is has anyone really used databinding in anything but the
simpliest application that will be used for commercial purposes?

I used it on a fairly serious vertical app once, and found that I had to
get under the hood of the databinding fairly often to get it to work
right. IMHO, DataBinding really wasn't worth the effort.

I still use it for internal tools where I don't mind the UI quirks and
just want to get something working quickly, but I wouldn't use it for a
commercial app. In my experience, rolling your own binding scheme
doesn't take any more code and it's a lot more flexible.

[Cor Ligthert [MVP]]

Dennis,

Using databinding is so simple. See this sample. Keep in mind one cavat
which is that pushing the data to a datarow will happens when there is a
rowchange. When there is a button or whatever event happening this is not
done. Therefore you need mostly the endcurrentedit, which force that
pushing.

http://www.windowsformsdatagridhelp....f-587f730fa118

Another point can be that you need to change the data if it is handled,
which needs binding events (by instance Null values from the database).

See for that this a little bit more complete sample of binding

http://www.windowsformsdatagridhelp....9-4deb7fa4a0b8

I hope this helps,

Cor

[Dennis]

Thanks for tips Cor but have you ever really used data binding in a serious
commercial applicaton? See David's reply on this thread because I had the
same experience that he did.
--
Dennis in Houston
"Cor Ligthert [MVP]" wrote:

Dennis,

Using databinding is so simple. See this sample. Keep in mind one cavat
which is that pushing the data to a datarow will happens when there is a
rowchange. When there is a button or whatever event happening this is not
done. Therefore you need mostly the endcurrentedit, which force that
pushing.

http://www.windowsformsdatagridhelp....f-587f730fa118

Another point can be that you need to change the data if it is handled,
which needs binding events (by instance Null values from the database).

See for that this a little bit more complete sample of binding

http://www.windowsformsdatagridhelp....9-4deb7fa4a0b8

I hope this helps,

Cor

[Dennis]

Thanks for reply David. I'm glad that someone else has had similiar
experiences with DataBinding. I was beginning to think that I was too stupid
to see the "Light" in using Data Binding.
--
Dennis in Houston
"david" wrote:

On 2005-09-18, Dennis <De****@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

I have tried using Databinding for my application but always seem to find it
very restrictive (maybe I don't completely understand it enough).

First, I assume we're talking WinForms here...

I always
seem to find it much easier to display a form, have the user fill it out then
put the data into a class representing a data row and then use the OLEadaptor
or OLECommands to update the database.

My question is has anyone really used databinding in anything but the
simpliest application that will be used for commercial purposes?

I used it on a fairly serious vertical app once, and found that I had to
get under the hood of the databinding fairly often to get it to work
right. IMHO, DataBinding really wasn't worth the effort.

I still use it for internal tools where I don't mind the UI quirks and
just want to get something working quickly, but I wouldn't use it for a
commercial app. In my experience, rolling your own binding scheme
doesn't take any more code and it's a lot more flexible.

[Cor Ligthert [MVP]]

Dennis,

Thanks for tips Cor but have you ever really used data binding in a
serious
commercial applicaton? See David's reply on this thread because I had the
same experience that he did.
--

I really dont't see what it matters if a application is sold 10000000000
times to a commercial market or is used by only one person inside a company
for simple use.

This approach from you and David sounds for me the same as those who are
telling that they have heard from their collegues that directly accessing
databases give errors.

Therefore they do still sequential access in a merging way of databases as
where it punching cards, because their collegue had the same.

The really problem is in those cases mostly is that people are not anymore
able to adept newer methods and stay with their olds.

Just my thought

Cor

[Dennis]

If I understand your comments correctly, you have only used Data Binding for
simple use by a few people in a company and not for commercial distribution!
It does make a difference when someone is forced to use the internal company
progams versus them using their free will to spend their personal $$$ to
purchase or not purchase an application.
--
Dennis in Houston
"Cor Ligthert [MVP]" wrote:

Dennis,

Thanks for tips Cor but have you ever really used data binding in a
serious
commercial applicaton? See David's reply on this thread because I had the
same experience that he did.
--

I really dont't see what it matters if a application is sold 10000000000
times to a commercial market or is used by only one person inside a company
for simple use.

This approach from you and David sounds for me the same as those who are
telling that they have heard from their collegues that directly accessing
databases give errors.

Therefore they do still sequential access in a merging way of databases as
where it punching cards, because their collegue had the same.

The really problem is in those cases mostly is that people are not anymore
able to adept newer methods and stay with their olds.

Just my thought

Cor

[Cor Ligthert [MVP]]

> If I understand your comments correctly, you have only used Data Binding

for
simple use by a few people in a company and not for commercial
distribution!
It does make a difference when someone is forced to use the internal
company
progams versus them using their free will to spend their personal $$$ to
purchase or not purchase an application.
--

I really don't see the connection in what you want to say.

Do you mean that you use your end-users for first raw testing by putting the
product not tested on a $$$ market.

The end-user should never see if a program is made by whatever tool or
method. A normal user cannot see if in a Microsoft product binding is used.
A product from what you are an end-user, and you say now that you will not
buy it as binding is used.

The end-user should only see the result, which has to be good and bug free
and therefore appending to the product better tested.

By an in house program you can use the end-user for testing. Although you
will see that the (bad)results of that comes back to you. For an not in
house project for a single company you use your own testing team plus an
end-user testing team. For the market you add to that if it is possible a
user-group.

However the tool with and how you made it, is something they should never
see.

Just my thought,

Cor

[david]

On 2005-09-20, Cor Ligthert [MVP] <no************@planet.nl> wrote:

Dennis,

Thanks for tips Cor but have you ever really used data binding in a
serious
commercial applicaton? See David's reply on this thread because I had the
same experience that he did.
--
I really dont't see what it matters if a application is sold
10000000000 times to a commercial market or is used by only one person
inside a company for simple use.

I'm sorry, but that's just an ignorant thing to say. Would you really
put together a large team of experienced UI designers to design an
interface for a simple app for one person?

This approach from you and David sounds for me the same as those who
are telling that they have heard from their collegues that directly
accessing databases give errors.
Unfortunately, what sounds for you seems to have the exact opposite
meaning of what's actually been written. Neither of us is stating
anything based on what we've heard from colleagues. We've used the
technology, for me at least in an app of fairly decent size, and found
that the it wasn't worth the effort.

In order to achieve a commercial quality responsive UI, one winds up
adding so much code to basic databinding that the databinding itself
becomes fairly worthless.

Again, I like databinding, and it's certainly simple and quick to use.
But the UI it creates by default is not particularly user-friendly,
although it is certainly useful for utility apps where UI support is not
a significant cost.
Therefore they do still sequential access in a merging way of
databases as where it punching cards, because their collegue had the
same.

The really problem is in those cases mostly is that people are not
anymore able to adept newer methods and stay with their olds.

Would you have said the same thing about VB6 data binding? Was it
avoided only because people could not adapt newer methods? Can
you accept the fact that it's at least *possible* that a newer
technology is not the best solution in certain situations?

[Dennis]

Cor, you are missing my point which is that I have found it to be very
difficult and time consuming to develop an application's UI using data
binding that is user friendly to someone who spends $$$ to buy it.

You say that not using data binding is "sticking to the old ways". If the
old ways are better, then I'll stidk to them.
--
Dennis in Houston
"david" wrote:

On 2005-09-20, Cor Ligthert [MVP] <no************@planet.nl> wrote:

Dennis,

Thanks for tips Cor but have you ever really used data binding in a
serious
commercial applicaton? See David's reply on this thread because I had the
same experience that he did.
--

I really dont't see what it matters if a application is sold
10000000000 times to a commercial market or is used by only one person
inside a company for simple use.

I'm sorry, but that's just an ignorant thing to say. Would you really
put together a large team of experienced UI designers to design an
interface for a simple app for one person?

This approach from you and David sounds for me the same as those who
are telling that they have heard from their collegues that directly
accessing databases give errors.

Unfortunately, what sounds for you seems to have the exact opposite
meaning of what's actually been written. Neither of us is stating
anything based on what we've heard from colleagues. We've used the
technology, for me at least in an app of fairly decent size, and found
that the it wasn't worth the effort.

In order to achieve a commercial quality responsive UI, one winds up
adding so much code to basic databinding that the databinding itself
becomes fairly worthless.

Again, I like databinding, and it's certainly simple and quick to use.
But the UI it creates by default is not particularly user-friendly,
although it is certainly useful for utility apps where UI support is not
a significant cost.

Therefore they do still sequential access in a merging way of
databases as where it punching cards, because their collegue had the
same.

The really problem is in those cases mostly is that people are not
anymore able to adept newer methods and stay with their olds.

Would you have said the same thing about VB6 data binding? Was it
avoided only because people could not adapt newer methods? Can
you accept the fact that it's at least *possible* that a newer
technology is not the best solution in certain situations?