>Is it just me or is
>
>REPLACE ;
> field1 with expression1, ;
> field2 with expression2 ;
> field3 with expression3 ;
> IN alias
>
>You can't get the fields out of synch with the values.
>
>Easier to read/maintain/modify than:
>
>INSERT INTO alias ;
> (field1, ;
> field2, ;
> field3) ;
> VALUES ;
> (expression1, ;
> expression2, ;
> expression3)
>
>If the field list gets out of synch with the values, that's going to be messy. Not only that, but with a longer list of fields, the chances of error goes up.
>
>Besides the advantages of doing the equivalent of an append blank and a replace all at the same time AND SQL compatibility, what other benefits are there to INSERT in VFP?

Mike,
I prefer insert over append blank/replace.
-Append blank would insert a blank record which rarely is just what I don't want to happen.
-With insert I can safely insert one or multiple rows at once. With append blank/replace approach there is a chance I'm replacing 'over' another user's data.
-From my POV insert syntax is better. You can't get the list out of sync if you don't do that on purpose.
etc
Cetin