记录开发人员的访问应用程序

本文介绍了记录开发人员的访问应用程序的处理方法，对大家解决问题具有一定的参考价值，需要的朋友们下面随着小编来一起学习吧！ 问题描述 我需要记录10年以上电力用户完全创建，开发和维护的MS-Access应用程序。

这是一个有趣的情况，因为他们想要的是一本手册，以便未来的开发人员可以在没有先前的域名知识的情况下进入，并在前端或后端进行更改

我在这个小项目中有几个问题：

• 什么是良好的手动设计创建应用程序？ Microsoft Word并没有完全削减它。
• 开发人员需要知道什么样的事情才能对窗体，报表，表格或其他Access对象进行更改？
• 还有其他我错过的？任何陷阱？

解决方案

根据我的经验，Access和基于VB6的程序受到更多的代码复制和技术的困扰债务比主流语言的程序。我不知道为什么也许Access是一个原型或玩具数据库的性质（虽然在正确生成时可能非常强大）。

如果我不得不在费用之间选择时间在文件上和花费时间减少技术债务，例如重塑，消除重复的代码，分割长期的功能等，我会选择后者。可维护性和可读性的改进将会更大。

I need to document a MS-Access application that was created, developed and maintained completely by a power-user over 10 years.

This is an interesting situation because what they want is a manual so that a future developer can come in without prior domain knowledge and make changes to the frontend or the backend in a timely manner.

There are a few questions on my mind for this little project:

• What is a good manual design creating application? Microsoft Word doesn't quite cut it.
• What kind of things would you, the developer, need to know in order to make changes to things like forms, reports, tables or other Access objects?
• Anything else I missed? Any pitfalls?

解决方案

In my experience, Access and VB6- based programs are plagued by more code replication and technical debt than programs in mainstream languages. I'm not sure why. Maybe it's the nature of Access as a "prototype" or "toy" database (though it can be quite powerful when yielded correctly).

If I had to choose between expending time on documentation and expending time on reducing technical debt, for example by remodularizing, eliminating repeated code, splitting long functions, etc., I would choose the latter. The improvement to maintainability and readability would be greater.