>>...i think VFP programming language can be greatly improved
>>to make it more consistent.
>
>Don't even think that please... If it could be done, it should
>already have been done 10 years ago in the days of Ashton Tate.
>And if M$ really starts changing the language, with the powerful
>conversion tools they usually accompany it with (sic!), like they
>passed from FPD to FPW or from FPW to VFP, then you can kiss it
>good bye.

Obviously we have different perspectives, not only about FoxPro,
but maybe about life too. I think FP language have evolved
(and changed) a lot since Ashton Tate days, and IMO this is very good. Of
course it implies having new learning curves, but hey, there is
always a price to pay. I don't see anything wrong about develogin
applications that work with FPD or FPW, but i wouldn't recomend anyone
to continue developing the same way with a tool like VFP.

Gee Marc 10 years is an eternity in software industry this
days. I'm sure it will continue evolving, just hope changes
make FoxPro a more consistent programming language.

>Marc in no particular mood.
Sounds like a dinosaur mood to me :)

Ciao,

J. Luis