Ted Roche wrote:
> On 7/31/07, Paul McNett <p (AT) ulmcnett D.OT com> wrote:
>
>> Visual FoxPro, in retrospect, hindered my understanding of programming.
>> I'd put a <g> there but I'm actually quite serious.
>
> Well, now you've got me worried, since I still consider VFP a native tongue.
>
> What aspects of VFP did you feel were bad to your understanding other
> languages? I've been power-cramming PHP, Python, bash, CSS and lots
> more into my head, and if there are habits I should un-learn that
> would help, I'd appreciate the insights.
I simply meant to say that it was so easy to do about 80% of the things
I wanted to do (and really really hard to do the final 10% or so). I got
spoiled with the visual class designer, and bought into it completely,
even though there were tremendous warts (not all base classes could be
subclassed into vcx, for one). I had no idea how much code I was
copy/pasting instead of reusing, simply because of the lack of multiple
inheritance. Being stuck on Windows because of my addiction to VFP kept
me from seeing and embracing all kinds of little development tools and
the Linux command line.
Not that FoxPro is "wrong", just that I was comfortable doing everything
in fox and so doing didn't realize there were other ways of doing
things. IOW, I wasn't continuing my education for at least a few years,
because I thought I had maxed out what was possible to do, but in truth
I had only maxed out what was possible to do in Fox, while Fox is but a
minor, stale part of a huge, vibrant programming universe.
--
pkm ~ http://paulmcnett.com
©2007 Paul McNett |
