Won't Run Second Time

[Ed Kleban]

On 12/29/05 2:12 PM, "Chuck Pelto" <cbpelto at pcisys.net> wrote:

> 
> On Dec 29, 2005, at 12:48 PM, Ed Kleban wrote:
> 
>> What examples are you looking at?  Are you using the Classes way or
>> the API
>> way or SQL way or some other way.
>> 
>> And who invented this "way" terminology in the first place?  No, don't
>> answer that one.  I think I already know who the way meister is.  ;-)
> 
> Interesting question. I asked Ruslan a while back if there was more
> than one 'way' to build the database structure.

A question phrased in this manner begs the question of which meaning of the
term "way" you mean.

> His reply indicated
> there was only ONE way to build it.

And so does such a restatement of a reply.

> However, looking at the various
> 'examples', there seems to be more than one 'way' to build the
> structure of the database.

And again.

> For example, there's the example of Single
> Table, which I'm using. Then there is the example in the tutorial,
> which is a completely different 'way'.
> 
> The impression I got from Ruslan's answer was that the various 'ways'
> related to ways one could access the data once the database was
> established.

I believe your impression is not an accurate one.
 
> Ruslan,
> 
> We need BETTER and more thoroughly described examples. I've asked
> this on numerous occasions, but I get the distinct impression my
> requests to improve this system are falling on deaf ears.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Chuck

LOL.  I constantly give Ruslan and his crew all manner of grief on the
quality and content of their documentation.  Interestingly however this is
one case where I disagree with your concern and in fact think they do a
rather excellent job of documenting the different "ways".  My question above
regarding the use of the term "way" was a bit tongue in cheek and
rhetorical.  As a concept I really like the various "way"s documented for
creating and accessing a V2 database.  As a term, well usage of the term
"way" brings up all manner of grammatical problems and ambiguities as you've
just demonstrated.  A better choice of term might have been "style" rather
than way.  

Whereas the documentation is fairly clear in terms of documenting the
differences among the different styles if you can get past the problems with
using the term "way", the Examples are simply excellent and indeed are
nicely sorted into separate folders by coding style.

So my little jab at the way-meister is really a suggestion I guess that in
V3 or V4 it might be better to overhaul all of the documentation to use a
more intuitive and less problematic term such as "style" instead of "way".
But it wouldn't be nearly as homey nor what I consider to be classic Ruslan
as usage of the current term way, which I've come to find very clear, very
distinctively Valentinsh.

--Ed