Re: Wish I was using .net

"MikeD" <nobody@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:%23tvgf4aNGHA.3360@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
You can't blame this on VB. GetNewConnection is apparently not returning
a reference to an ADODB.Connection object.

It is definately returning a connection object.

It it were, you'd have gotten a Type Mismatch error (I tested it to be
sure).

Yes but unfortunately the customer got the error not the programmer or
tester.

So, it's YOUR fault and ONLY your fault (or whoever the programmer was).

It most definately is.

There's no excuse for this bug not to have gotten discovered during
testing.

Possibly but the point is if we were using .net the error would have been
picked up immediately, it wouldn't have been left open to human error and
there would be zero chance of it getting to the customer. If programmers
make this same mistake enough times eventually one will get out.

This isn't the first time this has happened. We had some code that used a
Field object, somehow the order of references got mixed up and an
ADODB.Field all of a sudden became an ActiveReports.Field. Parts of the app
that were changed had been tested but we got the problem in an unchanged
part of the app. Basically VB compiled code that it should have know would
never run. Not only would dotnet have noticed the type mismatch but the
issue would never have arised because you are forced to specify the library
(namespace in dotnet) you are using.

As to "Wish I was using .net", well....use it then and quit your
bellyaching about VB6. <g>

When management let me move over then I'll stop complaining but I can't see
that happening in a hurry.

Other than ranting, what was the purpose of your message?

This stricter type casting is probably the single best feature in dotnet, it
is worth highlighting to those that haven't made the move yet. It might
sound like a minor change but you realise it is a huge advantage once you've
used it for a while. You also get errors if a function doesn't return a
value or if you fail to define the type for a variable. Plus you can't
specify an enum value on its own without prefixing it with the enum name, so
enums can't get mixed up even if they have really common names.

Michael


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Automated Test Scripts
    ... > customer is going to do with the system. ... Then that is a Testor role, regardless what's written on the business card. ... > requirements come from the customer to the BA and programmer. ... >> respond to test code without simulating raw inputs through the GUI ...
    (comp.software.testing)
  • Re: Using early-bound interface on a late-bound object
    ... > the compiler determines which interfaces to use, ... > supports the declared interface. ... >> help if someone can point me to some authoritative document or reference ... within customer shops when they mirrored this 'division' to keep their ...
    (microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion)
  • Re: Interview Questions
    ... > would wirelessly access the internet during an exam to find answers to ... required to answer the questions is necessary to be known without reference ... That eliminates from qualifying test ... IBM used to use a "Programmer Apptitude Test" in the '60s which I believe ...
    (comp.lang.cpp)
  • RE: ObjectDataSource in ASP.NET 2.0
    ... For datasourcecontrol and databindig control, ... it don't quite makesense to maintain such a in-memory reference. ... again from orginal datasource, e.g: ... | Customer customer = new Customer; ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.aspnet)
  • Re: Multi Dimensional Array Reallocation ?
    ... Compile time binding eliminates the need for ... >>> instance types on each reference, and the need to store class symbol ... >> It would free the programmer from these stinking limitations where the ... It makes much more sense to fit a design to the language. ...
    (alt.comp.lang.borland-delphi)