I didn't say I was offended. I said I took exception.

Your statment said:
"Most of the well qualified VFP folks have moved on. It is extremely difficult, if not impossible
to hire a well qualified VFP programmer today."

I don't think thats necessesarily the case. I do believe some converted to .Net, but you imply
that 'most', meaning the majority, have moved over, and I don't see that. I work in a VFP shop
with 10 VFP programmers and only 2 C# guys. The proportion depends on the situation. As I said
eariler, I am new to this company. When I was interviewing, most of the companies I went to said
they were commited to VFP for the foreseeable future. Thats where the well qualified VFP folks have
moved on to - places that haven't transitioned to some other language.

>>I consider people such as Kevin McNeish, Rick Strahl, etc., to be in the well qualified group.
You list these 2 guys because they are higher profile then most. That leaves alot of unnamed programmers
who still do VFP who don't write books or speak at devcon.






>I consider people such as Kevin McNeish, Rick Strahl, etc., to be in the well qualified group. I don't know why you would be offended at such a statement. It's a known reality. We had substantial difficulty hiring people several months ago. 100% of the people who I felt were in the top 10% of resumes submitted also had dotnet experience. And those that we offered to, accepted dotnet instead. None of the people with both dotnet and VFP experience that I talked to regreted working with dotnet.
>
>I said most. That doesn't mean that there still aren't some qualified VFP programmers out there. Just a boatload harder to find them then 10 yrs ago.
>
>
>>PMFJI,
>>
>>>>Most of the >> well qualified VFP folks have moved on. It is extremely difficult, if not impossible
>>>>to hire a well qualified VFP programmer today.
>>
>>I take exception to this statement. Define 'well-qualified'. I just got hired at my company, and I consider
>>myself extremely well qualified in VFP and better than average in C#.Net.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>As Kevin, my last word on the subject also. I've nothing to prove.
>>>
>>>- I know that I can build apps that deal with data just as well with dotnet/java as I can with VFP. With certain exceptions. You just have to think differently, as they deal with data in a different way.
>>>
>>>- I know that as a technologist, I feel more comfortable dealing with dotnet/java folks these days. Most of the well qualified VFP folks have moved on. It is extremely difficult, if not impossible to hire a well qualified VFP programmer today.
>>>
>>>- If I go job hunting on Dice.com, depending on the time of month, I might have a choice of 1 or 2 VFP jobs. Countless more dotnet/java opportunities.
>>>
>>>Finally, from a detailed perspective, I looked at some of the SP's used on the java version of an app I deal with. These are the SP's used for reporting, so the front end to the SP offers many options. The SP has a parameter for every option on the form. The where clause checks to see the parameter is null. If so it checks the table values against the parameter. Not rocket science, and in the end it works as well as the VFP version of the product.
>>>
>>>If there's a change request to add a new item to query on, I don't think it would be any different to change the SP vs. change the code to create a new SQL statement to be used in a SPT statement.
>>>
>>>>I sit next to one of the better DBAs I've ever worked with. And he kind of laughed when he saw what Walter said. Getting him to laugh at anything is a rather large accomplishment.
>>>>
>>>>Guffawing at others is not the sign of a confident adult expert IME.
>>>>
>>>>There are far more competent programmers who've left the VFP world and never looked back, then competent VFP programmers who decided to stay.
>>>>
>>>>Even if it were true, technical excellence is not a popularity contest.
>>>>
>>>>It seems you are unable to justify your beliefs at all.