I prefer REPLACE, for the reasons you mention, and also because it seems easier to find out why there are errors (buffering, tableupdate(), aerror()). Come to think of it, I have no clear idea how I would do that with INSERT INTO.
>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?
Difference in opinions hath cost many millions of lives: for instance, whether flesh be bread, or bread be flesh; whether whistling be a vice or a virtue; whether it be better to kiss a post, or throw it into the fire... (from Gulliver's Travels)
