Welcome To The Home Of The Visual FoxPro Experts  
home. signup. forum. archives. search. google. articles. downloads. faq. members. weblogs. file info. rss.
 From: Dan Baker
  Where is Dan Baker?
 Effort of the Poconos
 Pennsylvania - United States
 Dan Baker
 To: claude fox
  Where is claude fox?
 Centreville
 Virginia - United States
 claude fox
 Tags
Subject: RE: Scripting vs. traditional compiled
Thread ID: 268278 Message ID: 268828 # Views: 30 # Ratings: 0
Version: Not Applicable Category: Web Applications
Date: Wednesday, July 14, 2010 9:38:35 PM         
   


Claude:

Using ActiveVFP from the GoDaddy website as you recommended. Pleased with my progress so far.

For a few years now I've been both eager and afraid to get into PHP. Now I don't feel the need to go there. It's also a relief to think I may never again need to deal with the hassles of MySQL. Why not manage data using the familiar and robust VFP desktop, then FTP my data and templates to the web? That's nice.

At first I was intimidated by the ActiveVFP documentation: "Oh, no. Another interface to learn", I thought.

Luckily I don't need to learn all the functions right away. 90% of what I need to do on the web are simple things like: create a dynamic web page, output a list of hyperlinks, and create a data grid.

You only need to know two ActiveVFP techniques to do those things. The rest will come in time. Hope to soon have an example to share with the Foxite community.

Dan Baker

> I see VFP via ActiveVFP becoming a PHP/WordPress type of scripting language (ease of use, installation) on steroids (can call Win32 APIs directly, can be multi-threaded, can be OOP, data integrated, etc). .NET implements scripting in the aspx script (with C# or VB.NET) and you can also compile the code-behind to a dll (as you can in ActiveVFP, if desired). On further examination of Wikipedia, Foxpro is usually classified as the same type of programming language as C# and Java..However, I see ActiveVFP as being the less bloated and simpler environment to develop web apps in and being more like PHP in that regard.

ENTIRE THREAD

Scripting vs. traditional compiled Posted by claude fox @ 7/9/2010 5:28:02 PM
RE: Scripting vs. traditional compiled Posted by Mike Yearwood @ 7/9/2010 8:31:58 PM
RE: Scripting vs. traditional compiled Posted by claude fox @ 7/9/2010 8:36:50 PM
RE: Scripting vs. traditional compiled Posted by Mike Yearwood @ 7/13/2010 3:57:25 PM
RE: Scripting vs. traditional compiled Posted by claude fox @ 7/13/2010 4:44:18 PM
RE: Scripting vs. traditional compiled Posted by Mike Yearwood @ 7/13/2010 5:55:00 PM
RE: Scripting vs. traditional compiled Posted by claude fox @ 7/13/2010 7:06:18 PM
RE: Scripting vs. traditional compiled Posted by Mike Yearwood @ 7/13/2010 7:38:18 PM
RE: Scripting vs. traditional compiled Posted by Dan Baker @ 7/14/2010 9:38:35 PM
RE: Scripting vs. traditional compiled Posted by claude fox @ 7/14/2010 10:17:53 PM
RE: Scripting vs. traditional compiled Posted by Dan Baker @ 7/14/2010 11:26:52 PM
RE: Scripting vs. traditional compiled Posted by Neeraj Charne @ 7/15/2010 8:21:12 AM