Global Functions

[Anil Gupte]

I am trying to set up a function that connects to the database that I can
then use gloablly. I set up a class called L3Global in which I have a
function as follows:

Public Function SetDBConnect()
Dim ConnStrL3Produc er As String
ConnStrL3Produc er = "User ID=UID;Tag with column collation when
possible=False; Data Source=" & Chr(34) & "a.b.c.d" & Chr(34) &
";Password=PWD; "
ConnStrL3Produc er = ConnStrL3Produc er & "Initial Catalog=L3;Use Procedure
for Prepare=1;Auto Translate=True; Persist Security Info=True;Provi der="
ConnStrL3Produc er = ConnStrL3Produc er & Chr(34) & "SQLOLEDB.1 " & Chr(34) &
";Workstati on ID=AUM;Use Encryption for Data=False;Pack et Size=4096"
Dim ConnL3Producer As New OleDbConnection (ConnStrL3Produ cer)
Return ConnL3Producer
End Function

Now I want to use this is all my forms (MDI). I set up
Public L3G As New L3Global

and then under the approporate button click I have:
Dim ConnL3Producer As New OleDbConnection

ConnL3Producer = L3G.SetDBConnec t

The problem is, do I have to setup an instance of L3Global in each form?
That defeats the purpose, because each one opens a new connection. How can
I use this connection object in all my forms but open it only once? Ideally
I would like to move as much of the intialization (creating the OLEDBAdapter
etc) to the global routine.

Thanx for any suggestions.
--
Anil Gupte

https://www.keeninc.net

www.icinema.com

[Michel Posseth [MCP]]

Re: Global Functions


Well i would not recomend a global connection aproach in .Net

Because of the superb connection pool mechanism , you can now safely and
without anny performance overhead create , use , and destroy
especially the using statement is verry handy with this

personally i would store the connection string in the config file

regards

Michel



"Anil Gupte" <anil-list@icinema.co mschreef in bericht
news:Ofv0ON0HHH A.1188@TK2MSFTN GP06.phx.gbl...

>I am trying to set up a function that connects to the database that I can
>then use gloablly. I set up a class called L3Global in which I have a
>function as follows:
>
Public Function SetDBConnect()
Dim ConnStrL3Produc er As String
ConnStrL3Produc er = "User ID=UID;Tag with column collation when
possible=False; Data Source=" & Chr(34) & "a.b.c.d" & Chr(34) &
";Password=PWD; "
ConnStrL3Produc er = ConnStrL3Produc er & "Initial Catalog=L3;Use Procedure
for Prepare=1;Auto Translate=True; Persist Security Info=True;Provi der="
ConnStrL3Produc er = ConnStrL3Produc er & Chr(34) & "SQLOLEDB.1 " & Chr(34) &
";Workstati on ID=AUM;Use Encryption for Data=False;Pack et Size=4096"
Dim ConnL3Producer As New OleDbConnection (ConnStrL3Produ cer)
Return ConnL3Producer
End Function
>
Now I want to use this is all my forms (MDI). I set up
Public L3G As New L3Global
>
and then under the approporate button click I have:
Dim ConnL3Producer As New OleDbConnection
>
ConnL3Producer = L3G.SetDBConnec t
>
The problem is, do I have to setup an instance of L3Global in each form?
That defeats the purpose, because each one opens a new connection. How
can I use this connection object in all my forms but open it only once?
Ideally I would like to move as much of the intialization (creating the
OLEDBAdapter etc) to the global routine.
>
Thanx for any suggestions.
--
Anil Gupte

https://www.keeninc.net

www.icinema.com
>
>

[Anil Gupte]

Re: Global Functions

Thanx for that tip, but please explain:
"...especia lly the using statement is verry handy with this"

and also
"...persona lly i would store the connection string in the config file"

I am a newbie at .Net and last used VB five years ago for a few months.

--
Anil Gupte

https://www.keeninc.net

www.icinema.com

"Michel Posseth [MCP]" <MSDN@posseth.c omwrote in message
news:eqa5xv0HHH A.1280@TK2MSFTN GP04.phx.gbl...

>
Well i would not recomend a global connection aproach in .Net
>
Because of the superb connection pool mechanism , you can now safely and
without anny performance overhead create , use , and destroy
especially the using statement is verry handy with this
>
personally i would store the connection string in the config file
>
regards
>
Michel
>
>
>
"Anil Gupte" <anil-list@icinema.co mschreef in bericht
news:Ofv0ON0HHH A.1188@TK2MSFTN GP06.phx.gbl...

>>I am trying to set up a function that connects to the database that I can
>>then use gloablly. I set up a class called L3Global in which I have a
>>function as follows:
>>
>Public Function SetDBConnect()
>Dim ConnStrL3Produc er As String
>ConnStrL3Produ cer = "User ID=UID;Tag with column collation when
>possible=False ;Data Source=" & Chr(34) & "a.b.c.d" & Chr(34) &
>";Password=PWD ;"
>ConnStrL3Produ cer = ConnStrL3Produc er & "Initial Catalog=L3;Use Procedure
>for Prepare=1;Auto Translate=True; Persist Security Info=True;Provi der="
>ConnStrL3Produ cer = ConnStrL3Produc er & Chr(34) & "SQLOLEDB.1 " & Chr(34)
>& ";Workstati on ID=AUM;Use Encryption for Data=False;Pack et Size=4096"
>Dim ConnL3Producer As New OleDbConnection (ConnStrL3Produ cer)
>Return ConnL3Producer
>End Function
>>
>Now I want to use this is all my forms (MDI). I set up
>Public L3G As New L3Global
>>
>and then under the approporate button click I have:
>Dim ConnL3Producer As New OleDbConnection
>>
>ConnL3Produc er = L3G.SetDBConnec t
>>
>The problem is, do I have to setup an instance of L3Global in each form?
>That defeats the purpose, because each one opens a new connection. How
>can I use this connection object in all my forms but open it only once?
>Ideally I would like to move as much of the intialization (creating the
>OLEDBAdapter etc) to the global routine.
>>
>Thanx for any suggestions.
>--
>Anil Gupte
>www.keeninc.net
>www.icinema.com
>>
>>

>
>

[Tom Leylan]

Re: Global Functions

I can't know if you have but if you haven't heard of design patterns I think
you should spend a little time reading about them. Here is an overview:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_...mputer_science)

Particularly you are describing a Singleton pattern (there is code here in
C# which you can take a look at)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singleton_pattern

"Anil Gupte" <anil-list@icinema.co mwrote in message
news:Ofv0ON0HHH A.1188@TK2MSFTN GP06.phx.gbl...

>I am trying to set up a function that connects to the database that I can
>then use gloablly. I set up a class called L3Global in which I have a
>function as follows:
>
Public Function SetDBConnect()
Dim ConnStrL3Produc er As String
ConnStrL3Produc er = "User ID=UID;Tag with column collation when
possible=False; Data Source=" & Chr(34) & "a.b.c.d" & Chr(34) &
";Password=PWD; "
ConnStrL3Produc er = ConnStrL3Produc er & "Initial Catalog=L3;Use Procedure
for Prepare=1;Auto Translate=True; Persist Security Info=True;Provi der="
ConnStrL3Produc er = ConnStrL3Produc er & Chr(34) & "SQLOLEDB.1 " & Chr(34) &
";Workstati on ID=AUM;Use Encryption for Data=False;Pack et Size=4096"
Dim ConnL3Producer As New OleDbConnection (ConnStrL3Produ cer)
Return ConnL3Producer
End Function
>
Now I want to use this is all my forms (MDI). I set up
Public L3G As New L3Global
>
and then under the approporate button click I have:
Dim ConnL3Producer As New OleDbConnection
>
ConnL3Producer = L3G.SetDBConnec t
>
The problem is, do I have to setup an instance of L3Global in each form?
That defeats the purpose, because each one opens a new connection. How
can I use this connection object in all my forms but open it only once?
Ideally I would like to move as much of the intialization (creating the
OLEDBAdapter etc) to the global routine.
>
Thanx for any suggestions.
--
Anil Gupte

https://www.keeninc.net

www.icinema.com
>
>

[Anil Gupte]

Re: Global Functions

Hmm, I must be in a parallel universe. Just kidding of course, but I did
not follow most of what I read on those links, and I am not that much of a
programmer (nor do I ever hope to be). I am just building a prototype of
software that I want real programmers to write.

Anyway, if you have seen specific tutorials relating to this, please do let
me know.

Anyway Thanx,
--
Anil Gupte

https://www.keeninc.net

www.icinema.com

"Tom Leylan" <gee@iamtiredof spam.comwrote in message
news:eQJth94HHH A.420@TK2MSFTNG P06.phx.gbl...

>I can't know if you have but if you haven't heard of design patterns I
>think you should spend a little time reading about them. Here is an
>overview: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_...mputer_science)
>
Particularly you are describing a Singleton pattern (there is code here in
C# which you can take a look at)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singleton_pattern

>
>
"Anil Gupte" <anil-list@icinema.co mwrote in message
news:Ofv0ON0HHH A.1188@TK2MSFTN GP06.phx.gbl...

>>I am trying to set up a function that connects to the database that I can
>>then use gloablly. I set up a class called L3Global in which I have a
>>function as follows:
>>
>Public Function SetDBConnect()
>Dim ConnStrL3Produc er As String
>ConnStrL3Produ cer = "User ID=UID;Tag with column collation when
>possible=False ;Data Source=" & Chr(34) & "a.b.c.d" & Chr(34) &
>";Password=PWD ;"
>ConnStrL3Produ cer = ConnStrL3Produc er & "Initial Catalog=L3;Use Procedure
>for Prepare=1;Auto Translate=True; Persist Security Info=True;Provi der="
>ConnStrL3Produ cer = ConnStrL3Produc er & Chr(34) & "SQLOLEDB.1 " & Chr(34)
>& ";Workstati on ID=AUM;Use Encryption for Data=False;Pack et Size=4096"
>Dim ConnL3Producer As New OleDbConnection (ConnStrL3Produ cer)
>Return ConnL3Producer
>End Function
>>
>Now I want to use this is all my forms (MDI). I set up
>Public L3G As New L3Global
>>
>and then under the approporate button click I have:
>Dim ConnL3Producer As New OleDbConnection
>>
>ConnL3Produc er = L3G.SetDBConnec t
>>
>The problem is, do I have to setup an instance of L3Global in each form?
>That defeats the purpose, because each one opens a new connection. How
>can I use this connection object in all my forms but open it only once?
>Ideally I would like to move as much of the intialization (creating the
>OLEDBAdapter etc) to the global routine.
>>
>Thanx for any suggestions.
>--
>Anil Gupte
>www.keeninc.net
>www.icinema.com
>>
>>

>
>

[Tom Leylan]

Re: Global Functions

A fairly common problem developers run into is having non-developers explain
how to develop applications :-) I'll suggest that you ordinarily wouldn't
need to explain to a developer your preference for a single connection,
globally accessible from anywhere in the application. The developer(s) can
figure out a) if that is a good idea and b) how best to implement it.

Design patterns have been around for a very long time but (more or less)
recently were given names and categorized. There are many books and
thousands of articles on the subject but in a nutshell most of what
developers do isn't "new" and whether we are instantiating a customer,
inventory item, baseball score or anything else the process is the same. I
don't mean that the code exists I mean the "pattern" that the code will
follow exists. Your house may look completely different from another but it
will have a foundation, walls and a roof, those are givens.

Bottom line is when you have some time consider reading an introduction
articles on design patterns. If it does nothing else you may have the "aha"
moment when you find something you've been trying to explain to a developer
actually has a name and everybody already knows about it.

Also if you create a singleton class your "I don't want two instances"
problem goes away. There may be a dozen other tricky ways to do it but ask
yourself what is the advantage to not using a proven design that everybody
else is using?

Take care,
Tom


"Anil Gupte" <anil-list@icinema.co mwrote in message
news:%23pT5Xg5H HHA.1276@TK2MSF TNGP04.phx.gbl. ..

Hmm, I must be in a parallel universe. Just kidding of course, but I did
not follow most of what I read on those links, and I am not that much of a
programmer (nor do I ever hope to be). I am just building a prototype of
software that I want real programmers to write.
>
Anyway, if you have seen specific tutorials relating to this, please do
let me know.
>
Anyway Thanx,
--
Anil Gupte

https://www.keeninc.net

www.icinema.com
>
"Tom Leylan" <gee@iamtiredof spam.comwrote in message
news:eQJth94HHH A.420@TK2MSFTNG P06.phx.gbl...

>>I can't know if you have but if you haven't heard of design patterns I
>>think you should spend a little time reading about them. Here is an
>>overview: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_...mputer_science)
>>
>Particularly you are describing a Singleton pattern (there is code here
>in C# which you can take a look at)
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singleton_pattern
>>
>>
>"Anil Gupte" <anil-list@icinema.co mwrote in message
>news:Ofv0ON0HH HA.1188@TK2MSFT NGP06.phx.gbl.. .

>>>I am trying to set up a function that connects to the database that I can
>>>then use gloablly. I set up a class called L3Global in which I have a
>>>function as follows:
>>>
>>Public Function SetDBConnect()
>>Dim ConnStrL3Produc er As String
>>ConnStrL3Prod ucer = "User ID=UID;Tag with column collation when
>>possible=Fals e;Data Source=" & Chr(34) & "a.b.c.d" & Chr(34) &
>>";Password=PW D;"
>>ConnStrL3Prod ucer = ConnStrL3Produc er & "Initial Catalog=L3;Use
>>Procedure for Prepare=1;Auto Translate=True; Persist Security
>>Info=True;Pro vider="
>>ConnStrL3Prod ucer = ConnStrL3Produc er & Chr(34) & "SQLOLEDB.1 " & Chr(34)
>>& ";Workstati on ID=AUM;Use Encryption for Data=False;Pack et Size=4096"
>>Dim ConnL3Producer As New OleDbConnection (ConnStrL3Produ cer)
>>Return ConnL3Producer
>>End Function
>>>
>>Now I want to use this is all my forms (MDI). I set up
>>Public L3G As New L3Global
>>>
>>and then under the approporate button click I have:
>>Dim ConnL3Producer As New OleDbConnection
>>>
>>ConnL3Produce r = L3G.SetDBConnec t
>>>
>>The problem is, do I have to setup an instance of L3Global in each form?
>>That defeats the purpose, because each one opens a new connection. How
>>can I use this connection object in all my forms but open it only once?
>>Ideally I would like to move as much of the intialization (creating the
>>OLEDBAdapte r etc) to the global routine.
>>>
>>Thanx for any suggestions.
>>--
>>Anil Gupte
>>www.keeninc.net
>>www.icinema.com
>>>
>>>

>>
>>

>
>

[Branco Medeiros]

Re: Global Functions

Anil Gupte wrote:

I am trying to set up a function that connects to the database that I can
then use gloablly. I set up a class called L3Global in which I have a
function as follows:

Public Function SetDBConnect()

<snip>

Now I want to use this is all my forms (MDI). I set up
Public L3G As New L3Global
>
and then under the approporate button click I have:
Dim ConnL3Producer As New OleDbConnection
>
ConnL3Producer = L3G.SetDBConnec t
>
The problem is, do I have to setup an instance of L3Global in each form?
That defeats the purpose, because each one opens a new connection. How can
I use this connection object in all my forms but open it only once? Ideally
I would like to move as much of the intialization (creating the OLEDBAdapter
etc) to the global routine.

<snip>

I guess you can declare a Module, instead of a class:

<aircode>
Module L3Global
Private mConnection As OleDBConnection

Public Function ConnectDB() As OleDBConnection
If mConnection Is Nothing Then
Dim ConText As String = "Your connection string"
mCOnnection = New OleDBConnectins (ConText)
End If
Return mConnection
End Function
End Module
</aircode>

And then, in your Forms you'd have:

Dim ConnL3Producer _
As OleDbConnection = L3Global.Connec tDB()

Improvise over that.

Regards,

Branco.

[Stephany Young]

Re: Global Functions

Because you are not that much of a programmer (nor do you ever hope to be),
I strongly suggest that you do NOT build a prototype of software that you
want real programmers to write.

Instead, write a specification document that describes, at a fairly high
level, the purpose of the software, what the 'inputs' are, what the
'outputs' must be and what the expected outcomes are. Include details of
business rules and pictures of what various forms and reports should look
like. If there are any aspects of the specification that are immutable then
make those aspect clear and unambiguous. Also include details of what
technologies may or may not be used.

You will find that a real programmer, when presented with such a document,
will have no problems figuring out the best way to implement the design and
will be more productive than having to work from a protoype developed by
someone who doesn't really know what they are doing.


"Anil Gupte" <anil-list@icinema.co mwrote in message
news:%23pT5Xg5H HHA.1276@TK2MSF TNGP04.phx.gbl. ..

Hmm, I must be in a parallel universe. Just kidding of course, but I did
not follow most of what I read on those links, and I am not that much of a
programmer (nor do I ever hope to be). I am just building a prototype of
software that I want real programmers to write.
>
Anyway, if you have seen specific tutorials relating to this, please do
let me know.
>
Anyway Thanx,
--
Anil Gupte

https://www.keeninc.net

www.icinema.com
>
"Tom Leylan" <gee@iamtiredof spam.comwrote in message
news:eQJth94HHH A.420@TK2MSFTNG P06.phx.gbl...

>>I can't know if you have but if you haven't heard of design patterns I
>>think you should spend a little time reading about them. Here is an
>>overview: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Design_...mputer_science)
>>
>Particularly you are describing a Singleton pattern (there is code here
>in C# which you can take a look at)
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singleton_pattern
>>
>>
>"Anil Gupte" <anil-list@icinema.co mwrote in message
>news:Ofv0ON0HH HA.1188@TK2MSFT NGP06.phx.gbl.. .

>>>I am trying to set up a function that connects to the database that I can
>>>then use gloablly. I set up a class called L3Global in which I have a
>>>function as follows:
>>>
>>Public Function SetDBConnect()
>>Dim ConnStrL3Produc er As String
>>ConnStrL3Prod ucer = "User ID=UID;Tag with column collation when
>>possible=Fals e;Data Source=" & Chr(34) & "a.b.c.d" & Chr(34) &
>>";Password=PW D;"
>>ConnStrL3Prod ucer = ConnStrL3Produc er & "Initial Catalog=L3;Use
>>Procedure for Prepare=1;Auto Translate=True; Persist Security
>>Info=True;Pro vider="
>>ConnStrL3Prod ucer = ConnStrL3Produc er & Chr(34) & "SQLOLEDB.1 " & Chr(34)
>>& ";Workstati on ID=AUM;Use Encryption for Data=False;Pack et Size=4096"
>>Dim ConnL3Producer As New OleDbConnection (ConnStrL3Produ cer)
>>Return ConnL3Producer
>>End Function
>>>
>>Now I want to use this is all my forms (MDI). I set up
>>Public L3G As New L3Global
>>>
>>and then under the approporate button click I have:
>>Dim ConnL3Producer As New OleDbConnection
>>>
>>ConnL3Produce r = L3G.SetDBConnec t
>>>
>>The problem is, do I have to setup an instance of L3Global in each form?
>>That defeats the purpose, because each one opens a new connection. How
>>can I use this connection object in all my forms but open it only once?
>>Ideally I would like to move as much of the intialization (creating the
>>OLEDBAdapte r etc) to the global routine.
>>>
>>Thanx for any suggestions.
>>--
>>Anil Gupte
>>www.keeninc.net
>>www.icinema.com
>>>
>>>

>>
>>

>
>

[Anil Gupte]

Re: Global Functions

Thanx, that will get me started. Do you happen to know any place where I
can read more about when to use a Module and when to use a class?

Thanx again,
--
Anil Gupte

https://www.keeninc.net

www.icinema.com

"Branco Medeiros" <branco.medeiro s@gmail.comwrot e in message
news:1166131605 .256508.207250@ n67g2000cwd.goo glegroups.com.. .

Anil Gupte wrote:

>I am trying to set up a function that connects to the database that I can
>then use gloablly. I set up a class called L3Global in which I have a
>function as follows:

>

>Public Function SetDBConnect()

<snip>
>

>Now I want to use this is all my forms (MDI). I set up
>Public L3G As New L3Global
>>
>and then under the approporate button click I have:
>Dim ConnL3Producer As New OleDbConnection
>>
>ConnL3Produc er = L3G.SetDBConnec t
>>
>The problem is, do I have to setup an instance of L3Global in each form?
>That defeats the purpose, because each one opens a new connection. How
>can
>I use this connection object in all my forms but open it only once?
>Ideally
>I would like to move as much of the intialization (creating the
>OLEDBAdapter
>etc) to the global routine.

<snip>
>
I guess you can declare a Module, instead of a class:
>
<aircode>
Module L3Global
Private mConnection As OleDBConnection
>
Public Function ConnectDB() As OleDBConnection
If mConnection Is Nothing Then
Dim ConText As String = "Your connection string"
mCOnnection = New OleDBConnectins (ConText)
End If
Return mConnection
End Function
End Module
</aircode>
>
And then, in your Forms you'd have:
>
Dim ConnL3Producer _
As OleDbConnection = L3Global.Connec tDB()
>
Improvise over that.
>
Regards,
>
Branco.
>

[Tom Leylan]

Re: Global Functions

Anil: Yes you can read it right here :-) Never use a module!

VB.Net is an object-oriented language and by definition that should lead to
object-oriented solutions. If there is no OOP solution (and that would seem
unlikely given apps written in SmallTalk, C++, Java, C# and all the other
OOP-based languages) then one might find themselves forced into having to
resort to a "hack". Take my word for it don't start with the "hack" or you
will never stop applying hacks. People will stare at your code and giggle
behind your back...

What you are describing isn't a "module" you are describing a Singleton
Class. If you want to read something perhaps about the Singleton Class
would be a good start.

Try it you may like it.

"Anil Gupte" <anil-list@icinema.co mwrote in message
news:OCFPtkBIHH A.3676@TK2MSFTN GP03.phx.gbl...

Thanx, that will get me started. Do you happen to know any place where I
can read more about when to use a Module and when to use a class?
>
Thanx again,
--
Anil Gupte

https://www.keeninc.net

www.icinema.com
>
"Branco Medeiros" <branco.medeiro s@gmail.comwrot e in message
news:1166131605 .256508.207250@ n67g2000cwd.goo glegroups.com.. .

>Anil Gupte wrote:

>>I am trying to set up a function that connects to the database that I
>>can
>>then use gloablly. I set up a class called L3Global in which I have a
>>function as follows:

>>

>>Public Function SetDBConnect()

><snip>
>>

>>Now I want to use this is all my forms (MDI). I set up
>>Public L3G As New L3Global
>>>
>>and then under the approporate button click I have:
>>Dim ConnL3Producer As New OleDbConnection
>>>
>>ConnL3Produce r = L3G.SetDBConnec t
>>>
>>The problem is, do I have to setup an instance of L3Global in each form?
>>That defeats the purpose, because each one opens a new connection. How
>>can
>>I use this connection object in all my forms but open it only once?
>>Ideally
>>I would like to move as much of the intialization (creating the
>>OLEDBAdapte r
>>etc) to the global routine.

><snip>
>>
>I guess you can declare a Module, instead of a class:
>>
><aircode>
> Module L3Global
> Private mConnection As OleDBConnection
>>
> Public Function ConnectDB() As OleDBConnection
> If mConnection Is Nothing Then
> Dim ConText As String = "Your connection string"
> mCOnnection = New OleDBConnectins (ConText)
> End If
> Return mConnection
> End Function
> End Module
></aircode>
>>
>And then, in your Forms you'd have:
>>
> Dim ConnL3Producer _
> As OleDbConnection = L3Global.Connec tDB()
>>
>Improvise over that.
>>
>Regards,
>>
>Branco.
>>

>
>

[=?Utf-8?B?RGVubmlz?=]

Re: Global Functions

Funny, I always thought a module was a Singleton Class!
--
Dennis in Houston


"Tom Leylan" wrote:

Anil: Yes you can read it right here :-) Never use a module!
>
VB.Net is an object-oriented language and by definition that should lead to
object-oriented solutions. If there is no OOP solution (and that would seem
unlikely given apps written in SmallTalk, C++, Java, C# and all the other
OOP-based languages) then one might find themselves forced into having to
resort to a "hack". Take my word for it don't start with the "hack" or you
will never stop applying hacks. People will stare at your code and giggle
behind your back...
>
What you are describing isn't a "module" you are describing a Singleton
Class. If you want to read something perhaps about the Singleton Class
would be a good start.
>
Try it you may like it.
>
"Anil Gupte" <anil-list@icinema.co mwrote in message
news:OCFPtkBIHH A.3676@TK2MSFTN GP03.phx.gbl...

Thanx, that will get me started. Do you happen to know any place where I
can read more about when to use a Module and when to use a class?

Thanx again,
--
Anil Gupte

https://www.keeninc.net

www.icinema.com

"Branco Medeiros" <branco.medeiro s@gmail.comwrot e in message
news:1166131605 .256508.207250@ n67g2000cwd.goo glegroups.com.. .

Anil Gupte wrote:
>I am trying to set up a function that connects to the database that I
>can
>then use gloablly. I set up a class called L3Global in which I have a
>function as follows:
>
>Public Function SetDBConnect()
<snip>
>
>Now I want to use this is all my forms (MDI). I set up
>Public L3G As New L3Global
>>
>and then under the approporate button click I have:
>Dim ConnL3Producer As New OleDbConnection
>>
>ConnL3Produc er = L3G.SetDBConnec t
>>
>The problem is, do I have to setup an instance of L3Global in each form?
>That defeats the purpose, because each one opens a new connection. How
>can
>I use this connection object in all my forms but open it only once?
>Ideally
>I would like to move as much of the intialization (creating the
>OLEDBAdapter
>etc) to the global routine.
<snip>
>
I guess you can declare a Module, instead of a class:
>
<aircode>
Module L3Global
Private mConnection As OleDBConnection
>
Public Function ConnectDB() As OleDBConnection
If mConnection Is Nothing Then
Dim ConText As String = "Your connection string"
mCOnnection = New OleDBConnectins (ConText)
End If
Return mConnection
End Function
End Module
</aircode>
>
And then, in your Forms you'd have:
>
Dim ConnL3Producer _
As OleDbConnection = L3Global.Connec tDB()
>
Improvise over that.
>
Regards,
>
Branco.
>

>
>
>

[Cor Ligthert [MVP]]

Re: Global Functions

Tom,

I hope to disappoint you, however it seems that C# programmers cannot stand
the word "module".

However a singleton C# class is as far as I know nothing more than a module,
which residence at the stack.

Beside the slight misbehaviour that a variable declared in a module can be
called in VB.Net without its module name, is in my idea the module much
nicer for declaring and using shared parts in a program.

I would never write, "Never use a module", I agree with you when it becomes.
"Try to avoid a module, static class, singleton, shared class or whatever
you name them."

Cor

"Tom Leylan" <tleylan@nospam .netschreef in bericht
news:%23GH2CULI HHA.3424@TK2MSF TNGP02.phx.gbl. ..

Anil: Yes you can read it right here :-) Never use a module!
>
VB.Net is an object-oriented language and by definition that should lead
to object-oriented solutions. If there is no OOP solution (and that would
seem unlikely given apps written in SmallTalk, C++, Java, C# and all the
other OOP-based languages) then one might find themselves forced into
having to resort to a "hack". Take my word for it don't start with the
"hack" or you will never stop applying hacks. People will stare at your
code and giggle behind your back...
>
What you are describing isn't a "module" you are describing a Singleton
Class. If you want to read something perhaps about the Singleton Class
would be a good start.
>
Try it you may like it.
>
"Anil Gupte" <anil-list@icinema.co mwrote in message
news:OCFPtkBIHH A.3676@TK2MSFTN GP03.phx.gbl...

>Thanx, that will get me started. Do you happen to know any place where I
>can read more about when to use a Module and when to use a class?
>>
>Thanx again,
>--
>Anil Gupte
>www.keeninc.net
>www.icinema.com
>>
>"Branco Medeiros" <branco.medeiro s@gmail.comwrot e in message
>news:116613160 5.256508.207250 @n67g2000cwd.go oglegroups.com. ..

>>Anil Gupte wrote:
>>>I am trying to set up a function that connects to the database that I
>>>can
>>>then use gloablly. I set up a class called L3Global in which I have a
>>>function as follows:
>>>
>>>Public Function SetDBConnect()
>><snip>
>>>
>>>Now I want to use this is all my forms (MDI). I set up
>>>Public L3G As New L3Global
>>>>
>>>and then under the approporate button click I have:
>>>Dim ConnL3Producer As New OleDbConnection
>>>>
>>>ConnL3Produc er = L3G.SetDBConnec t
>>>>
>>>The problem is, do I have to setup an instance of L3Global in each
>>>form?
>>>That defeats the purpose, because each one opens a new connection. How
>>>can
>>>I use this connection object in all my forms but open it only once?
>>>Ideally
>>>I would like to move as much of the intialization (creating the
>>>OLEDBAdapt er
>>>etc) to the global routine.
>><snip>
>>>
>>I guess you can declare a Module, instead of a class:
>>>
>><aircode>
>> Module L3Global
>> Private mConnection As OleDBConnection
>>>
>> Public Function ConnectDB() As OleDBConnection
>> If mConnection Is Nothing Then
>> Dim ConText As String = "Your connection string"
>> mCOnnection = New OleDBConnectins (ConText)
>> End If
>> Return mConnection
>> End Function
>> End Module
>></aircode>
>>>
>>And then, in your Forms you'd have:
>>>
>> Dim ConnL3Producer _
>> As OleDbConnection = L3Global.Connec tDB()
>>>
>>Improvise over that.
>>>
>>Regards,
>>>
>>Branco.
>>>

>>
>>

>
>

[Tom Leylan]

Re: Global Functions

Hi Cor (and Dennis):

A quick search of newsgroup messages reveals that similar conversations have
taken place before. One in particular involved Kevin Spencer explaining why
the VB Module exists (backwards compatibility) and offering his opinion that
it should have been removed. I agree with him.

While it may constitute "a class with static properties and no constructor"
I see no reason to provide a second syntax for creating such a thing. Why
not a third or fourth syntax as well? I really don't want to rehash all the
points because for every point made there will be a counterpoint and we
simply duplicate countless other threads.

I would hesitate to describe it as a Singleton class however. There is in
fact a single object in a Singleton class and all properties do not need to
be static. The instantiation of that object can be delayed until "first
use". One can obtain a reference to the singleton object which can be
passed as a parameter to other methods. If these things can be done with
the VB module that's cool but again I ask why do we need two ways to obtain
identical results? Furthermore we cannot create a singleton class using
Module syntax subclassed from an arbitrary class right? So it is not only a
"dupe" it is a limited use duplication.

I believe it comes down to clarity of design. I can't explain it better but
we don't need a language to implement every person's favorite way to do
something. If anybody wants "module" functionality couldn't they simply
declare a class in the way that the module does and get it? There it is,
available to anybody who wants it, not part of the official language syntax,
not misinterpreted as being a VB feature, etc.

Cor, you're misinterpreting or simply guessing. It isn't that C#
programmers can or cannot stand the word module. A C programmer doesn't
think more clearly than a VB programmer, a dBASE programmer doesn't rank
somewhere in a good programmer chart. There are good and bad (shall we call
them neat and sloppy) programmers using every language. There is often a
division between people who love having "&" and "+" available to concatenate
strings and those who ask, why two operators? Some may find two ways "a
brilliant design" while others will say it creates unnecessary ambiguity. I
wouldn't say that C# developers find it odd and VB developers find it cool.

The VB module doesn't add anything to the language (that I am aware of) and
as such it should be removed from the language.


"Cor Ligthert [MVP]" <notmyfirstname @planet.nlwrote in message
news:%233D%23WL hIHHA.2456@TK2M SFTNGP06.phx.gb l...

Tom,
>
I hope to disappoint you, however it seems that C# programmers cannot
stand the word "module".
>
However a singleton C# class is as far as I know nothing more than a
module, which residence at the stack.
>
Beside the slight misbehaviour that a variable declared in a module can be
called in VB.Net without its module name, is in my idea the module much
nicer for declaring and using shared parts in a program.
>
I would never write, "Never use a module", I agree with you when it
becomes. "Try to avoid a module, static class, singleton, shared class or
whatever you name them."
>
Cor
>
"Tom Leylan" <tleylan@nospam .netschreef in bericht
news:%23GH2CULI HHA.3424@TK2MSF TNGP02.phx.gbl. ..

>Anil: Yes you can read it right here :-) Never use a module!
>>
>VB.Net is an object-oriented language and by definition that should lead
>to object-oriented solutions. If there is no OOP solution (and that
>would seem unlikely given apps written in SmallTalk, C++, Java, C# and
>all the other OOP-based languages) then one might find themselves forced
>into having to resort to a "hack". Take my word for it don't start with
>the "hack" or you will never stop applying hacks. People will stare at
>your code and giggle behind your back...
>>
>What you are describing isn't a "module" you are describing a Singleton
>Class. If you want to read something perhaps about the Singleton Class
>would be a good start.
>>
>Try it you may like it.
>>
>"Anil Gupte" <anil-list@icinema.co mwrote in message
>news:OCFPtkBIH HA.3676@TK2MSFT NGP03.phx.gbl.. .

>>Thanx, that will get me started. Do you happen to know any place where
>>I can read more about when to use a Module and when to use a class?
>>>
>>Thanx again,
>>--
>>Anil Gupte
>>www.keeninc.net
>>www.icinema.com
>>>
>>"Branco Medeiros" <branco.medeiro s@gmail.comwrot e in message
>>news:11661316 05.256508.20725 0@n67g2000cwd.g ooglegroups.com ...
>>>Anil Gupte wrote:
>>>>I am trying to set up a function that connects to the database that I
>>>>can
>>>>then use gloablly. I set up a class called L3Global in which I have a
>>>>function as follows:
>>>>
>>>>Public Function SetDBConnect()
>>><snip>
>>>>
>>>>Now I want to use this is all my forms (MDI). I set up
>>>>Public L3G As New L3Global
>>>>>
>>>>and then under the approporate button click I have:
>>>>Dim ConnL3Producer As New OleDbConnection
>>>>>
>>>>ConnL3Produ cer = L3G.SetDBConnec t
>>>>>
>>>>The problem is, do I have to setup an instance of L3Global in each
>>>>form?
>>>>That defeats the purpose, because each one opens a new connection.
>>>>How can
>>>>I use this connection object in all my forms but open it only once?
>>>>Ideally
>>>>I would like to move as much of the intialization (creating the
>>>>OLEDBAdapte r
>>>>etc) to the global routine.
>>><snip>
>>>>
>>>I guess you can declare a Module, instead of a class:
>>>>
>>><aircode>
>>> Module L3Global
>>> Private mConnection As OleDBConnection
>>>>
>>> Public Function ConnectDB() As OleDBConnection
>>> If mConnection Is Nothing Then
>>> Dim ConText As String = "Your connection string"
>>> mCOnnection = New OleDBConnectins (ConText)
>>> End If
>>> Return mConnection
>>> End Function
>>> End Module
>>></aircode>
>>>>
>>>And then, in your Forms you'd have:
>>>>
>>> Dim ConnL3Producer _
>>> As OleDbConnection = L3Global.Connec tDB()
>>>>
>>>Improvise over that.
>>>>
>>>Regards,
>>>>
>>>Branco.
>>>>
>>>
>>>

>>
>>

>
>

[Cor Ligthert [MVP]]

Re: Global Functions

Tom,

A class in OOP has to be instanced, (you wrote it in my idea yourself) so
that it can sit on the heap. You are true that I am guessing that a
Singleton Class is doing the same as a so called not official existing
Static Class in C# does, I could not yet find it where it residence, so I
should not have written that. There are differences in with the VB Module
and the Singleton, however as much as the behaviour between + and $
concationation in VB.

I like however the name "Module". It makes it for me very clear, that a
module is not a class, it is a part of the main object as it is fixed in the
program. An instances object however sits on the managed heap and will be as
as soon as that is possible removed. I find this name Module therefore nicer
than any Shared/Static class, which is in fact no class in the OOP meaning.

It is possible to write a Module in the same way as a class, and be than not
forced to use the Shared keyword. In a very short discussion between Kevin
Spencer and me about this (with a very small sample from me) he somewhere
wrote a relative short while ago something in these newsgroups as. "You are
right Cor, I did not know this behaviour from the Module". However, to
search special messages on Google from either Kevin or me is not easy.

Cor


"Tom Leylan" <tleylan@nospam .netschreef in bericht
news:eZiI8qhIHH A.2232@TK2MSFTN GP02.phx.gbl...

Hi Cor (and Dennis):
>
A quick search of newsgroup messages reveals that similar conversations
have taken place before. One in particular involved Kevin Spencer
explaining why the VB Module exists (backwards compatibility) and offering
his opinion that it should have been removed. I agree with him.
>
While it may constitute "a class with static properties and no
constructor" I see no reason to provide a second syntax for creating such
a thing. Why not a third or fourth syntax as well? I really don't want
to rehash all the points because for every point made there will be a
counterpoint and we simply duplicate countless other threads.
>
I would hesitate to describe it as a Singleton class however. There is in
fact a single object in a Singleton class and all properties do not need
to be static. The instantiation of that object can be delayed until
"first use". One can obtain a reference to the singleton object which can
be passed as a parameter to other methods. If these things can be done
with the VB module that's cool but again I ask why do we need two ways to
obtain identical results? Furthermore we cannot create a singleton class
using Module syntax subclassed from an arbitrary class right? So it is
not only a "dupe" it is a limited use duplication.
>
I believe it comes down to clarity of design. I can't explain it better
but we don't need a language to implement every person's favorite way to
do something. If anybody wants "module" functionality couldn't they
simply declare a class in the way that the module does and get it? There
it is, available to anybody who wants it, not part of the official
language syntax, not misinterpreted as being a VB feature, etc.
>
Cor, you're misinterpreting or simply guessing. It isn't that C#
programmers can or cannot stand the word module. A C programmer doesn't
think more clearly than a VB programmer, a dBASE programmer doesn't rank
somewhere in a good programmer chart. There are good and bad (shall we
call them neat and sloppy) programmers using every language. There is
often a division between people who love having "&" and "+" available to
concatenate strings and those who ask, why two operators? Some may find
two ways "a brilliant design" while others will say it creates unnecessary
ambiguity. I wouldn't say that C# developers find it odd and VB
developers find it cool.
>
The VB module doesn't add anything to the language (that I am aware of)
and as such it should be removed from the language.
>
>
"Cor Ligthert [MVP]" <notmyfirstname @planet.nlwrote in message
news:%233D%23WL hIHHA.2456@TK2M SFTNGP06.phx.gb l...

>Tom,
>>
>I hope to disappoint you, however it seems that C# programmers cannot
>stand the word "module".
>>
>However a singleton C# class is as far as I know nothing more than a
>module, which residence at the stack.
>>
>Beside the slight misbehaviour that a variable declared in a module can
>be called in VB.Net without its module name, is in my idea the module
>much nicer for declaring and using shared parts in a program.
>>
>I would never write, "Never use a module", I agree with you when it
>becomes. "Try to avoid a module, static class, singleton, shared class or
>whatever you name them."
>>
>Cor
>>
>"Tom Leylan" <tleylan@nospam .netschreef in bericht
>news:%23GH2CUL IHHA.3424@TK2MS FTNGP02.phx.gbl ...

>>Anil: Yes you can read it right here :-) Never use a module!
>>>
>>VB.Net is an object-oriented language and by definition that should lead
>>to object-oriented solutions. If there is no OOP solution (and that
>>would seem unlikely given apps written in SmallTalk, C++, Java, C# and
>>all the other OOP-based languages) then one might find themselves forced
>>into having to resort to a "hack". Take my word for it don't start with
>>the "hack" or you will never stop applying hacks. People will stare at
>>your code and giggle behind your back...
>>>
>>What you are describing isn't a "module" you are describing a Singleton
>>Class. If you want to read something perhaps about the Singleton Class
>>would be a good start.
>>>
>>Try it you may like it.
>>>
>>"Anil Gupte" <anil-list@icinema.co mwrote in message
>>news:OCFPtkBI HHA.3676@TK2MSF TNGP03.phx.gbl. ..
>>>Thanx, that will get me started. Do you happen to know any place where
>>>I can read more about when to use a Module and when to use a class?
>>>>
>>>Thanx again,
>>>--
>>>Anil Gupte
>>>www.keeninc.net
>>>www.icinema.com
>>>>
>>>"Branco Medeiros" <branco.medeiro s@gmail.comwrot e in message
>>>news:1166131 605.256508.2072 50@n67g2000cwd. googlegroups.co m...
>>>>Anil Gupte wrote:
>>>>>I am trying to set up a function that connects to the database that I
>>>>>can
>>>>>then use gloablly. I set up a class called L3Global in which I have
>>>>>a
>>>>>function as follows:
>>>>>
>>>>>Public Function SetDBConnect()
>>>><snip>
>>>>>
>>>>>Now I want to use this is all my forms (MDI). I set up
>>>>>Public L3G As New L3Global
>>>>>>
>>>>>and then under the approporate button click I have:
>>>>>Dim ConnL3Producer As New OleDbConnection
>>>>>>
>>>>>ConnL3Prod ucer = L3G.SetDBConnec t
>>>>>>
>>>>>The problem is, do I have to setup an instance of L3Global in each
>>>>>form?
>>>>>That defeats the purpose, because each one opens a new connection.
>>>>>How can
>>>>>I use this connection object in all my forms but open it only once?
>>>>>Ideally
>>>>>I would like to move as much of the intialization (creating the
>>>>>OLEDBAdapt er
>>>>>etc) to the global routine.
>>>><snip>
>>>>>
>>>>I guess you can declare a Module, instead of a class:
>>>>>
>>>><aircode>
>>>> Module L3Global
>>>> Private mConnection As OleDBConnection
>>>>>
>>>> Public Function ConnectDB() As OleDBConnection
>>>> If mConnection Is Nothing Then
>>>> Dim ConText As String = "Your connection string"
>>>> mCOnnection = New OleDBConnectins (ConText)
>>>> End If
>>>> Return mConnection
>>>> End Function
>>>> End Module
>>>></aircode>
>>>>>
>>>>And then, in your Forms you'd have:
>>>>>
>>>> Dim ConnL3Producer _
>>>> As OleDbConnection = L3Global.Connec tDB()
>>>>>
>>>>Improvise over that.
>>>>>
>>>>Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>Branco.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>

>>
>>

>
>

[Cor Ligthert [MVP]]

Re: Global Functions

Tom,

My expection that the Singleton is not instanced but seats on the Main part
is that it is in my eyes very inefficient to do it in another way if it has
to be forever in a program.

Cor

"Cor Ligthert [MVP]" <notmyfirstname @planet.nlschre ef in bericht
news:eMiSmcmIHH A.3952@TK2MSFTN GP02.phx.gbl...

Tom,
>
A class in OOP has to be instanced, (you wrote it in my idea yourself) so
that it can sit on the heap. You are true that I am guessing that a
Singleton Class is doing the same as a so called not official existing
Static Class in C# does, I could not yet find it where it residence, so I
should not have written that. There are differences in with the VB Module
and the Singleton, however as much as the behaviour between + and $
concationation in VB.
>
I like however the name "Module". It makes it for me very clear, that a
module is not a class, it is a part of the main object as it is fixed in
the program. An instances object however sits on the managed heap and will
be as as soon as that is possible removed. I find this name Module
therefore nicer than any Shared/Static class, which is in fact no class in
the OOP meaning.
>
It is possible to write a Module in the same way as a class, and be than
not forced to use the Shared keyword. In a very short discussion between
Kevin Spencer and me about this (with a very small sample from me) he
somewhere wrote a relative short while ago something in these newsgroups
as. "You are right Cor, I did not know this behaviour from the Module".
However, to search special messages on Google from either Kevin or me is
not easy.
>
Cor
>
>
"Tom Leylan" <tleylan@nospam .netschreef in bericht
news:eZiI8qhIHH A.2232@TK2MSFTN GP02.phx.gbl...

>Hi Cor (and Dennis):
>>
>A quick search of newsgroup messages reveals that similar conversations
>have taken place before. One in particular involved Kevin Spencer
>explaining why the VB Module exists (backwards compatibility) and
>offering his opinion that it should have been removed. I agree with him.
>>
>While it may constitute "a class with static properties and no
>constructor" I see no reason to provide a second syntax for creating such
>a thing. Why not a third or fourth syntax as well? I really don't want
>to rehash all the points because for every point made there will be a
>counterpoint and we simply duplicate countless other threads.
>>
>I would hesitate to describe it as a Singleton class however. There is
>in fact a single object in a Singleton class and all properties do not
>need to be static. The instantiation of that object can be delayed until
>"first use". One can obtain a reference to the singleton object which
>can be passed as a parameter to other methods. If these things can be
>done with the VB module that's cool but again I ask why do we need two
>ways to obtain identical results? Furthermore we cannot create a
>singleton class using Module syntax subclassed from an arbitrary class
>right? So it is not only a "dupe" it is a limited use duplication.
>>
>I believe it comes down to clarity of design. I can't explain it better
>but we don't need a language to implement every person's favorite way to
>do something. If anybody wants "module" functionality couldn't they
>simply declare a class in the way that the module does and get it? There
>it is, available to anybody who wants it, not part of the official
>language syntax, not misinterpreted as being a VB feature, etc.
>>
>Cor, you're misinterpreting or simply guessing. It isn't that C#
>programmers can or cannot stand the word module. A C programmer doesn't
>think more clearly than a VB programmer, a dBASE programmer doesn't rank
>somewhere in a good programmer chart. There are good and bad (shall we
>call them neat and sloppy) programmers using every language. There is
>often a division between people who love having "&" and "+" available to
>concatenate strings and those who ask, why two operators? Some may find
>two ways "a brilliant design" while others will say it creates
>unnecessary ambiguity. I wouldn't say that C# developers find it odd and
>VB developers find it cool.
>>
>The VB module doesn't add anything to the language (that I am aware of)
>and as such it should be removed from the language.
>>
>>
>"Cor Ligthert [MVP]" <notmyfirstname @planet.nlwrote in message
>news:%233D%23W LhIHHA.2456@TK2 MSFTNGP06.phx.g bl...

>>Tom,
>>>
>>I hope to disappoint you, however it seems that C# programmers cannot
>>stand the word "module".
>>>
>>However a singleton C# class is as far as I know nothing more than a
>>module, which residence at the stack.
>>>
>>Beside the slight misbehaviour that a variable declared in a module can
>>be called in VB.Net without its module name, is in my idea the module
>>much nicer for declaring and using shared parts in a program.
>>>
>>I would never write, "Never use a module", I agree with you when it
>>becomes. "Try to avoid a module, static class, singleton, shared class
>>or whatever you name them."
>>>
>>Cor
>>>
>>"Tom Leylan" <tleylan@nospam .netschreef in bericht
>>news:%23GH2CU LIHHA.3424@TK2M SFTNGP02.phx.gb l...
>>>Anil: Yes you can read it right here :-) Never use a module!
>>>>
>>>VB.Net is an object-oriented language and by definition that should
>>>lead to object-oriented solutions. If there is no OOP solution (and
>>>that would seem unlikely given apps written in SmallTalk, C++, Java, C#
>>>and all the other OOP-based languages) then one might find themselves
>>>forced into having to resort to a "hack". Take my word for it don't
>>>start with the "hack" or you will never stop applying hacks. People
>>>will stare at your code and giggle behind your back...
>>>>
>>>What you are describing isn't a "module" you are describing a Singleton
>>>Class. If you want to read something perhaps about the Singleton Class
>>>would be a good start.
>>>>
>>>Try it you may like it.
>>>>
>>>"Anil Gupte" <anil-list@icinema.co mwrote in message
>>>news:OCFPtkB IHHA.3676@TK2MS FTNGP03.phx.gbl ...
>>>>Thanx, that will get me started. Do you happen to know any place
>>>>where I can read more about when to use a Module and when to use a
>>>>class?
>>>>>
>>>>Thanx again,
>>>>--
>>>>Anil Gupte
>>>>www.keeninc.net
>>>>www.icinema.com
>>>>>
>>>>"Branco Medeiros" <branco.medeiro s@gmail.comwrot e in message
>>>>news:116613 1605.256508.207 250@n67g2000cwd .googlegroups.c om...
>>>>>Anil Gupte wrote:
>>>>>>I am trying to set up a function that connects to the database that
>>>>>>I can
>>>>>>then use gloablly. I set up a class called L3Global in which I have
>>>>>>a
>>>>>>functio n as follows:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Public Function SetDBConnect()
>>>>><snip>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Now I want to use this is all my forms (MDI). I set up
>>>>>>Public L3G As New L3Global
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>and then under the approporate button click I have:
>>>>>>Dim ConnL3Producer As New OleDbConnection
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>ConnL3Pro ducer = L3G.SetDBConnec t
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>The problem is, do I have to setup an instance of L3Global in each
>>>>>>form?
>>>>>>That defeats the purpose, because each one opens a new connection.
>>>>>>How can
>>>>>>I use this connection object in all my forms but open it only once?
>>>>>>Ideally
>>>>>>I would like to move as much of the intialization (creating the
>>>>>>OLEDBAdap ter
>>>>>>etc) to the global routine.
>>>>><snip>
>>>>>>
>>>>>I guess you can declare a Module, instead of a class:
>>>>>>
>>>>><aircode >
>>>>> Module L3Global
>>>>> Private mConnection As OleDBConnection
>>>>>>
>>>>> Public Function ConnectDB() As OleDBConnection
>>>>> If mConnection Is Nothing Then
>>>>> Dim ConText As String = "Your connection string"
>>>>> mCOnnection = New OleDBConnectins (ConText)
>>>>> End If
>>>>> Return mConnection
>>>>> End Function
>>>>> End Module
>>>>></aircode>
>>>>>>
>>>>>And then, in your Forms you'd have:
>>>>>>
>>>>> Dim ConnL3Producer _
>>>>> As OleDbConnection = L3Global.Connec tDB()
>>>>>>
>>>>>Improvis e over that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>Regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>Branco.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>

>>
>>

>
>