> Bring on some decent local file handling stuff and many here have already stated their intention to reassess. The heat has gone out of it. Look at this thread- the usual culprits burst in guffawing and trying to cause trouble, but they were ignored.
>
>ADO.NET handles local, disconnected data more effectively than is commonly realized in this forum. No, ADO.NET does not do everything that VFP can do. But the UT has multiple experienced .NET developers with strong backgrounds in VFP, who are building the types of applications they previously built in VFP. Some have shared their experiences in the form of answering questions, so there's a wealth of material available to PUTM members. I won't speak for others, but I don't miss or lament the lack of the VFP cursor.
>

(snip)

I agree with most of what you say but have to admit I do miss VFP cursors. The beauty is that once they are created you can pretty much handle them like "real" tables. The same commands work. It doesn't matter whether the source data was in a FoxPro table, a database table, or a cursor whose structure was defined on the fly in the program. I am facing a very specific situtation with the app I am converting now. The VFP app made extensive use of cursors, some of which became input to subsequent SQL queries. I haven't figured out yet how to include a disconnected dataset in a SQL query under .NET 2005. Sure, I can spin through the Dataset, DataTable, and DataRow collections, but that will be rewriting. I would love to keep the SQL code.