The fact is, they broke it in VFP 8. It worked until VFP 7. And this is a very common thing to do . . . setting the ActivePage to x, so it could trip up a lot of people. And anytime the error results in an unintended record pointer movement, it opens the possibility for data corruption or the wrong data being stored in the wrong record. This is not something that should happen in a DBMS. They ought to take this seriously and fix it.

And what about existing code? There was no workaround in place because it used to not cause a problem. If you upgraded to VFP 8, then your code was broken and you wouldn't know it. I continue to be amazed that they seemingly ignore a problem that causes unintended record pointer movement. Amazing!

><snip>
>
>>Now the question is, will it get fixed? I didn't examine Fabio's posting in detail, but my repro code that I posted shows an unintended record pointer movement, which is very serious, IHMO.
>>
>>Russell
>>
>Hi Russell
>
>The fact is that there is a workaround, and therefore this error will have a low priority.