From: michaelh@g2syd.genasys.com.au (Michael Haldey)
Subject: Re: Recommendation for dBase III+ development system/libraries
Keywords: dBase development
Organization: Genasys II, Sydney, Australia
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 03:58:09 GMT

In article <435@dprmpt.UUCP> larry@dprmpt.UUCP (Larry) writes:
>I have an application originally written several years ago in dBase
>III+ that has to be upgraded so it can become a commercial product.
>Over the years it has been upgraded from a single-user to a
>network-based system, supports various printers, etc.  In the current
>system, all data is entered by an operator directly into the
>application, but future requirements mandate the ability to handle
>file input (not in a format that dBase "likes").
>
>For several reasons I would like to convert from the dBase language 
>to a high-level language (preferably C) for speed and maintainability.  
>I'm looking for recommendations on development systems.  
>
>My requirements are:
>1.  I don't want to distribute source code (.exe files only).
>2.  I need a way to read text (ASCII) files and extract data to
>    populate the database (.dbf) files and update the indexes (.ndx).
>3.  Executables produced must be royalty-free.
>4.  Must be multi-user, support record locking, and run on a variety of 
>    LANs (i.e.  we don't want to be tied to Novell, for example). 
>5.  Windows support is a plus, but not required.
>6.  Must be able to translate existing dBase language programs.
>
>I've heard a little about CodeBase (Sequiter Software) and I thought I 
>might have found just what I needed.  Then someone told me to check 
>into CA-Clipper (Computer Associates).  I found a catalog that listed 
>a few others, i.e. ARAGO (Wordtech Systems) and FUNCky II (dLESKO, Inc) 
>that looked like they might also be candidates.
>

Clipper seems to be the product you need, providing some limits. 
If you are going to be limited DOS (this is right technically for such
systems) and not going to make smth extraordinary on the network level,
I'd recommend you Clipper. The strong features are that it is a known
relatively stable product, completely compatible with dBase (some commands
are not but they are not used in development).  Clipper is quite
flexible and easy in programming.  In my opinion, to write in Clipper is
at least 50% faster than in CodeBase; if calculate on ready for sale,
debugged product. 

I never had problems programming in Clipper under Novell, but I've seen
a number of problems on the net connected with some other products. As
far as I understand, Clipper use quite consistent, DOS compatible way to
handle locks, so it may be problems of the environment, if so, you'll
get trouble from any library.

CodeBase will give you more flexibility than Clipper but development is
slower; if you do need to port your systems, say, into UNIX, I do not
advise you to use it.

I've read about FUNCky II and it seems yet another attempt to provide
C code generation for Clipper (I maybe wrong). I see a lot of flaws in this
way.

Do not hesitate to e-mail if you need further help.

Michael
-- 
Michael Haldey  |  Genasys II Pty Ltd, Sydney, Australia
                |  Phone:    +61-2-954-2878 (-9930 FAX)
                |  Internet: michaelh@g2syd.genasys.com.au