Re: HTML and PDF Reports

["Crispin" <cbates@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Sorry David, but I have to disagree with you :-)

David Gibbs wrote:


> Of course without a good understanding of the generated code, trying to 
> fix problems in the code is going to be a nightmare.

Sure, but you certainly SHOULD NOT be modifying the generated code. You
SHOULD BE going back to the tool and resolving the bug at the higher level
generators afford you.

> In my experience (granted, somewhat limited to a single vendor's 
> product, but I have seen the output from other vendors tools), the code 
> that is generated is horrendous and next to impossible to debug.

I'd be interested in which vendor that was.

I have worked with multiple tools that generate code. The fact that they
generate code the same way every time means that they are MUCH easier to
debug. I know what the generator will generate, what the program flow will
be. I DON'T have to change my thought process to match another coders coding
style.

> Personally, I think code generators of any kind are a pox on the 
> industry.  Using a code generator might be OK for a prototype, but to 
> create usable, maintainable, adaptable, applications you need to develop 
> the code by hand ... or at least use a tool that emits the end result 
> code so you have full code comprehension.

And that's why we're arguing about which technology is better to get a
business application to the Web, rather than getting it there. I've used
generators for almost 20 years. I write WinC/Java/5250/HTML clients. I write
JDBC/ODBC/SQL Server/DB2 backends. I put the business logic where it makes
sense. I can change where each piece goes on a whim.

I don't care that I use a tool. I use the tool to get the job done. I cared
when I first looked at generated code 18 years ago, because I was an RPG
coder, and I wanted to keep my job as a programmer. I see too many people
get defensive when it comes to something else writing the code for them. I
think these people need to get over it.

Just My Opinion :-)