|
|
Posted by robert on 04/26/06 05:54
wow...you got pissy fast.
| The best tool for the job is the one that doe the job as required.
i can put a nail in a plank with the heel of my shoe...wanna rethink that?
| > the best solution would be to use sql server (since he's a windows guy),
| > hit
| > a page, parse it (you can even use regular expressions in sql server
now),
| > and store it. dts packages work wonders for segmenting and scheduling
the
| > work. there are downloadable versions of sql server 2k5 that are
| > "free-enough" that could be used.
|
| Thanks for telling me what you think the best solution is ??
advice is free and getting some may get someone to rethink
stategy...although some here (read, you) find advice offensible and as a
plight of self-importance and subjugation.
| The process presently works and works well, read the OP and you'll see
what
| I actually asked, you may find this information useful in answering the
| question.
oh, i read it...can't dream of anyone paying someone to architect that as a
viable solution. but then again, i wasn't going there. i was offering a
suggestion and nothing more.
| The solution current parses the web page downloaded by Excel and extract
| data items and stores them in an SQL Server 2005 db using ADO. I am
looking
| at migrating this function over to MySQL and PHP hence the original post
| which simply asked "can I control Excel objects in php too ?"
yeah, i got that. had you not been so patronized by my suggestion, you could
simply do away with 3 supporting cogs in your desire to parse and store
html. and, since you are already familiar with sql server and com, i would
think you'd be greatful to know that...and had you behaved, i may have given
you the source code to do all that within sql server...problem solved and
solution provided as freely as the advice i gave.
| > then again, i assume he's not a full-time programmer since vb is
| > preferable
|
| Rule no 1 Robert, never assume anything, regardless of how good you think
it
| makes you sound. The old addage... when you assume you make an ASS of U
and
| ME except this itme you've only made an ASS of U :)
first let me say this regarding conventional wisdom. it is simply convenient
and rarely wise and the term was coined as a damnation of this oxymoron
(people are more likely to believe even what is false as long as it is more
palatible than other alternatives). assumption can also be equated to
discernment - which is how all of our knowlege advances.
further, i reiterate that i cannot imagine anyone paying for such a
solution...hence the next logical thesis which i believe i stated fairly.
| > to vba and wouldn't require excel's cheesy web toolbar to hit the
| > internet...he could use vb's cheesy web ocx's. that means he probably
| > doesn't have sql server either since it would seem excel is where he
| > stores
| > his results.
|
| In your mind how did you incorrectly conclude that SQL Server was not used
| and results were stored in Excel ? I am curious as I never stated this or
| were you just rambling too caught up in the moment to stop and think about
| what you wre typing ?
again, because i cannot believe such a system would be gerrymandered as a
viable solution (especially where consideration is involved)...unless excel
were the primary storage fascility. it's called inference - another word
that better suits your negative use of "assumption". but yes, apparently i
AM wrong...next logical thesis...you're not an architect. hint, it's ok to
be wrong in assumptions...it's how we find what the case actually is when
there is a lack of information. it is stupidity not to make them at all
because someone may say the good ol' ass-u-me phrase. that's beyond silly.
perhaps my first suggestion(s) came off as offensive. i can accept that as
part of the drawback of communicating in this medium. it was not my
intention. it would have been nice to have been offered a chance to clarify
my intentions...would have been.
oh well.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|