Jump to content

Writing to a Access Database


Recommended Posts

I am somewhat new to writing AutoIt scripts that make database calls and I am having no luck with sample code such as

;$adoCon = ObjCreate ("ADODB.Connection")
;$adoCon.Open ("Provider=Microsoft.Jet.OLEDB.4.0; Data Source=c:\temp\test.mdb")
;$adoCon.Execute ("INSERT INTO table1 (field1, field2) Values (2, 'EvoD530')")
;$adoCon.Close

I get "unable to parse line" errors and it just seems to not work at all.

Am I missing something? I am using AutoIt 3.1.1 and SciTE for editing and yes I have tried doing a beta compile, running it without compliling and everything else I can think of. I have also tried other peoples scripts for SQL and I just get complie errors. Am I missing a dll, a library of some kind or a function that I need to include?

Please help. I want to be able to log results to a Access database and eventually a SQL database such as inventory etc.

Thank you up front...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The release of AutoIt v4 will not be any time soon, so you can cross out days and week's. Saying AutoIt v4 make's me get all giddy inside lol. Month's is more in the correct time period, how many I don't know.

Edited by Burrup

qq

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Final release for AutoIt v4 will not be any time soon, so you can cross out days and week's. Saying AutoIt v4 make's me get all giddy inside lol. Month's is more in the correct time period, how many I don't know.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

AutoIt v4? Is there a hidden forum about I don't have access to or something? I thought we were only on v3...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know what I meant :) .

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

However true that may be, that is irrelevant, the person you were responding to may not, so providing correct information is imperatitive to those who "don't know any better".
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't of noticed that I had made a "mistake" unless you had pointed it out... Would you like me to change it to "The release of AutoIt v4..." instead of "Final release for AutoIt v4..."?

Edited by Burrup

qq

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These COM objects are a very cool new feature!!!! This opens up so many new avenues and takes AutoIt to the next level.

And who you calling a newbie :)

I really want to thank all you developers for providing such a kick a$$ product, we use it here in a major health care organization to run scripts on about 9000 workstations and have some pretty amazing scripts. Have been using it for over 4 years now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't of noticed that I had made a "mistake" unless you had pointed it out... Would you like me to change it to "The release of AutoIt v4..." instead of "Final release for AutoIt v4..."?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Errrr.... there is no AutoIt v4.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know! Let us wander back through the year's to kindergarden, 1, 2, 3, 4! 4 comes after 3. We are currently in AutoIt v3, what do you think is next?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, I think I can say with some degree of confidence that 3.2 is next provided we continue with the same version numbering we've used in the past. I don't know why you mention v4 at all but that has absolutely nothing to do with when a version of AutoIt will be released that has COM support (Which is what dcovell is asking for). When 3.2 becomes final, it will have COM. We'll then begin work on 3.2+ just like we released 3.1 and are now at 3.1+.

So why are you talking about AutoIt v4?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This will be my last post, because this is getting boring.

I interpretted dcovell's post as wanting to know the release date of the next major release of AutoIt or the 'final release', as he worded it, of the current beta.

It appear's to me that no one else seem's to have a problem with how I worded it, including dcovell.

qq

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I said next release, I just meant the next stable release, even if it is version 3.1.1.1.1.1.1.2. Sorry for causing the argument, 3.2 would be a nice versioning as the COM objects are quite a nice new feature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Imagine the feuds over numbering/naming schemes at a certain software corporation in the northwestern US. :)

Here are version tags from their OS line of products:

3.11 - 95 - 98 - Millennium - 2000 - XP

And the office package:

6 - 97 - 2000 - XP -2002 - 2003

How's that for consistency?

Ignorance is strength.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Imagine the feuds over numbering/naming schemes at a certain software corporation in the northwestern US.  :)

Here are version tags from their OS line of products:

3.11 - 95 - 98 - Millennium - 2000 - XP

And the office package:

6 - 97 - 2000 - XP -2002 - 2003

How's that for consistency?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

They are still versioned correctly, though. Ask a programmer what version of Visual C++ he uses. Chance are he'll say "7" or "7.1" despite the fact that those are named Visual C++ .NET (also known as Visual C++ .NET 2002) and Visual C++ .NET 2003. I also know that Office 2003 = version 11. Adobe Photoshop CS = 8, CS2 = 9. Windows XP is 5.1.

Even though a glossy name has been applied, these programs still do use the same (or similar) version schemes that AutoIt does and these can all be verified by looking at the relevant file versions. Those who need to know the versions or need to understand them, know them. For the rest of the people who can't keep a version straight in their head, a nice name helps, although I will say that Microsoft convoluted things with its "XP" line of products instead of giving them a year signifier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...