If contracting someone with more experience to do the conversion is no option, then you might as well just dive in - there are still plenty of people who know FoxPro2. As Stuart mentioned, conversions and such Yes, old. If you are interested, let me know. I've been doing Fox since before Microsoft bought it There's an foxdoc. Hope this helps. Stack Overflow for Teams — Collaborate and share knowledge with a private group.
Create a free Team What is Teams? Collectives on Stack Overflow. Learn more. Reviving an obsolete Fox Pro application [closed] Ask Question. Asked 10 years, 6 months ago. Active 7 years, 9 months ago. NET interoperability, and more. Sign in to vote. Thursday, July 24, AM. You may need to rebuild application in order to use all vfp9 features and will be eazy because you have the old code or theoreticaly the old program can run in vfp9 with minor screen properties modifications but the interface will be poor.
Thursday, July 24, PM. I wouldn't go that route. The consensus, by far, is not to do a conversion but to rewrite the program completely. It is a huge leap in software development technologies from FPW2. I can tell you now that if you use any automated converter tool you will not be happy with the results. Screens will mostly work but will look more than ugly. This is the time to re-architect the program as a 3-Tier maybe web-enable if you need that object oriented program.
The business rules and the code that enforces it can probably be saved and reused as it will be mostly compatible with VFP. The rest should be re-designed an rewritten from scratch. I know it is not what a client wants to hear, but take the advice from the old timers that have been there many times.
Granor 0. Since you appear to have all the source code, you can do a fairly easy test, as follows: In Windows: 0 Make a copy of the entire development tree. Choose Visual Conversion to create a runnable application. Then, resave it. If the project compiles without error, you're way ahead of the game.
In that case, try running the EXE and see what the results look like. Chances are you'll think it's way too ugly to use. If the project doesn't compile, come back here and we'll help you fix the errors that are keeping it from compiling, so you can finish this experiment. I think that with FP2. I can't remember whether you had to buy it separately, or just install it separately.
Update, Document No. Includes the following materials: 17 HD 3. Also one HD Help Compiler disk, Printed materials are identical to the full license version below, with the following exceptions: Box sleeve right side bottom Part No. Includes the following materials: 17 3. One 3. Rear bard code labeled Retail box sleeve rear lower left Part No. MS Part Numbers: Standard retail, 3. This apparently can only be distinguished from the full license by the box. Visual FoxPro 3. Purple triangle label : "Academically Priced" on upper right of box front.
Probably includes at least the following manuals: Language Reference, Developer's Guide, Product number V Box rear lower left marked Part No. Jewel case rear insert Part no. System requirements: or higher processor running Windows 3. Mouse or compatible pointing device. VGA or higher resolution. Visual FoxPro Professional Edition 3. Box rear bottom left Part No. Installation program will search your disk to confirm eligibility.
Jewel case front insert Part No. Jewel case rear insert Part No. Standard Edition 3. Files for 3. The 3. FX, Bar code: Diskettes: 13 - 1. Professional Edition 3. Labeled Disc Assy. Jewel case front insert rear Part no. Info thanks to J. Diskinson: Version : 3. CD Disk Assy. Version : 3. This lists versions 3. Visual FoxPro version 3. Do you know different? You qualify for this upgrade if you are a licensed user of FoxPro 2. Academic edition packaging shown.
0コメント