I think there is no automatic way to convert a PRG to a visual class.

More important, perhaps, is under what circumstances you can subclass. It seems to me that you can base a PRG class from a PRG class, a visual class from a visual class, and a PRG class from a visual class; but not a visual class from a PRG class.

>Cetin,
>
>First off, THANKS TO EVERYONE who has replied! =)
>
>The reason for this thread is that our team is trying to find "common ground" - we intend to come up with our own set of common base classes, and that we are evaluating what's the best way.
>
>Would it be better to have one common method of doing classes (VCX OR PRG)?
>
>Or would a mixed (VCX AND PRG) way of doing classes not be any issue? Or would it create havoc/confusion? (Like having to switch between a text editor and the visual class designer?)
>
>A VCX class can be converted to a PRG class - is it also so vice versa?
>
>
>Sincerely
>Dennis
>
>
>
>>>Hi All,
>>>
>>>I and a friend are having a discussion on how to best create and maintain classes. He suggested that we programmatically code our classes. I, however, am very comfortable designing/coding classes visually - that is, using the Visual Class Designer.
>>>
>>>Although one can very well convert a VCX based class (or a Form even) to a PRG class via Class Browser/View Code, the issue of performance and best practices comes to mind.
>>>
>>>Which executes faster? Is coding classes programatically more popular? Or better practice?
>>>
>>>Many thanks to anyone who shares his/her insights!
>>>
>>>Dennis
>>
>>Dennis,
>>I think your words answer it:
>>"I, however, am very comfortable designing/coding classes visually"
>>IMHO take whichever you're comfortable with.
>>Cetin