Re: Bang vs. Dot - final answer

On Fri, 30 Sep 2005 07:48:49 -0400, "Darryl Kerkeslager"
<kerkeslager@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>I once did all my control references with the bang (!) operator. All my
>controls were referenced as Me!txtInput, etc.
>
>I have now discovered that doing this loses much more than Intellisense.
>
>1. Compile does not pick up missing controls, i.e., if I have a reference to
>Me!btnEdit, and remove that button from my form, Compile will not show a
>warning. It *will* show a warning if I have referenced my control as
>Me.btnEdit.
>
>2. Compile will not flag certain syntax errors - for instance, mistakenly
>typing Me!btnEdit.SetFocus = True
>
>Reason enough, I think, to always use the dot operator, even if it is not
>'correct'.

Everything you say is true, and it's not enough.

The problem is that Access is just plain less reliable when you use a dot
reference for controls. I have about 10 times as much project corruption
using dot references as bang references, and the kinds of corruption that can
occur using the dot references can be really nasty including problems that
actually corrupt the linked back-end database when entering data through the
form, and problems that prevent opening the form in design view at all, so the
form must be recreated or re-imported from an old copy to get working again.
.

Quantcast