Not sure who would have told you *not* to compile, or why.
If your users will have different versions of Access, you need to compile
using the lowest version. For example, if you have some users with Office
2000, and others with Office 2003, you need to compile using Access 2000.
Explanation:
Access 2003 can read code compiled in Access 2000, but not the reverse.
Hence, if you compile in A2003, when the mdb is opened in A2000, it can't
make sense of the A2003 binary, so it will treat the database as uncompiled.
In a perfect world, that would work transparently. In practice, it can lead
to weird errors that make no sense at all.
If that happens, decompiling is the way to sort it out (i.e. the command
line switch /decompile.) Perhaps that's what you heard.
The best solution might be to create an MDE using the lowest version you
need to handle, and give that the the users. It not only prevents them from
fiddling with the database (e.g. changing the code or modifying the forms),
but it also can't decompile.
--
Allen Browne - Microsoft MVP. Perth, Western Australia
Tips for Access users -
http://allenbrowne.com/tips.html
Reply to group, rather than allenbrowne at mvps dot org.
"LilMorePlease" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:721DDBA3-D901-482F-AAA1-(E-Mail Removed)...
> I've designed a database that will soon be distributed to another
> location.
> I recall reading somewhere, but can't find it, that there is a reason to
> not
> compile the modules before distribution. Anyone know if there are
> drawbacks
> to compiling the modules?
>
> TIA!
Similar Threads
