Personally (ducking the rocks) I still use SDA for all my display files.
I tried CODE (and yes it works...) but from my opinion SDA is just
better. I'll give the new WDSC integrated one when it's a part of the
basic package and performs at least as well as SDA (or better). Plus at
this time learning CODE for displays is going to be a waste of time
since it's going the way of the dinosaur...stick with SDA and wait for
it's replacement...again this is JMO!!!
<puts on flame-retardant clothing>
Thanks,
Tommy Holden
-----Original Message-----
From: wdsci-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [
mailto:wdsci-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Bill Barnes
Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2007 3:13 PM
To: wdsci-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [WDSCI-L] Continued CODE Issues
I am really trying to use this product but keep running into road
blocks. The latest is that today I was designing a screen to replace
one already being used. I worked about 4 hours figuring out what fields
needed to stay and which ones needed to be removed. I had the first
screen 2/3 done when I got a little message saying there was a problem
with CODE and did I want to send the error report. At that point
everything went away. Add that to my 4 hours lost yesterday comes t a
full day of work into the bit bucket. This is unacceptable in my
estimation. If and when IBM decides to let the riff raff use the NAI
version of CODE I will try it on something small. In direct
contradiction to those that love it I would caution anyone contemplating
using this tool to STAY AWAY, at least for now. I am too old to be
losing days.
Thanks
Bill Barnes
midrange.com
