>Believe me, I know there could be other issues--there already ARE issues well beyond the use of reserved words. I've been a Fox programmer for many years, an MVP, a teacher, a user group leader for a dozen years and even an expert witness in litigation. These experiences have taught me to be precise and factual when critiquing another's work. I can't expect the client to pay me to rewrite their application (and that is what needs to be done in this case) if I can't provide evidence that the application is faulty and document in what way(s) this is so. I would expect them to ask: why are reserved words causing a problem now when we've used the application successfully for 15 years? It's a good question and I need to be able to give them an answer. If reserved words are causing this problem, I'm hoping some of you can help me with the "burden of proof." <g>

This isn't a whole lot... each version of VFP introduces new reserved words, and these new reserved words are for a variety of new/different functionality.

I would feel confident in saying that VFP5 code, regardless the quality, likely wasn't tested under VFP 9.

good luck. You've got a real sticky one there.