Pertti,
(Please do not take my comments as a negative act. I don't have such an intention and actually already talked with my biz manager to buy the product for supporting whether or not we use it).

I am somewhat worried about open-source style write/test and send. Instead each function implementaion could be placed somewhere (like wiki or anyhting similar) to be edited and perfected by academic level discussions (here I do not really mean to discuss it at academies, but as sometimes we all do, discuss on the code to find the best implementation - we do it here too much to find a better performing code sample for example). Honestly at this moment Fabio comes to mind as a perfect QA manager:)
For example I'd at least add m. in your code:) We all have timing problems but we all would give a hand to such a thing I think.
(and I wonder if we could also write implementation from .Net direction too, ending an enhanced version of functions etc. - I don't know yet if that is possible with eTechnologia.xxx and has any legal problems).
Cetin

>Y'all:
>
>This is a call for action.
>
>There's no denying that the Microsoft VFP product will soon be on its last leg, and this is a bummer for most, if not all VFP developers. However, here's a chance for Foxpro developers to stop wringing their hands and put them to a better and much more constructive use. And all you need to know is Foxpro!
>
>Here's how:
>
>If you know VFP, even a little (and even if you don't know much at all about .NET), you, too, can participate in building a fully VFP syntax -compatible compiler for .NET. All you need to know is VFP syntax, you don't need to know C# or VB.NET or any other "foreign" stuff, to get started at least.
>
>Disclaimer: I am in no way affiliated with eTecnologia.net, financially or otherwise. Heck, I don't even know where these guys are located! But the budding technology here is quite amazing and holds a lot of promise for us soon-to-be-orphaned-from-Microsoft VFP developers.
>
>To demonstrate how simple it is for pretty much anyone to help out here, I created a new BETWEEN() -function for .NET that is 100% compatible with the same VFP function. This is one of the functions marked as "Not yet implemented" at the bottom half of www.etecnologia.net/http://www.etecnologia.net/Products/VFPCompiler/ImplementedFunctionality.htm. To differentiate the .NET version from the VFP version for unit testing, I prefaced the function name with "_" -- but this is by no means a generally accepted way, it just made sense to me. Which is not to say that it might not collide with internal .NET functions or accepted .NET syntax rules.)
>
>And here's what the .NET BETWEEN() -function/procedure looks like:
>
>

>****************************************
>PROCEDURE _BETWEEN  &&Handled as a procedure call/header for now, until a better FUNCTION header functionality is available
>
>   LPARAMETERS tu1, tu2, tu3
>   LOCAL llRetVal
>   llRetVal = .T.
>   IF VARTYPE(tu1) = 'U' OR VARTYPE(tu2) = 'U' OR VARTYPE(tu3) = 'U'
>      ?"ERROR: Invalid number of parameters!"   && Error handling stub
>      llRetVal = .F.
>   ENDIF
>   IF llREtVal = .T. AND ;
>      ( VARTYPE(tu1) != VARTYPE(tu2) OR ;
>        VARTYPE(tu1) != VARTYPE(tu3) OR ;
>        VARTYPE(tu2) != VARTYPE(tu3) ;
>      )
>      ?"ERROR: Data type mismatch!"   && Error handling stub
>      llRetVal = .F.
>   ENDIF
>   IF llRetVal = .T.
>      llRetVal = .F.
>      IF tu1 >= tu2 AND tu1 <= tu3
>         llRetVal = .T.
>      ENDIF
>   ENDIF
>RETURN llRetVal
>*****************************************
>

>
>To call the function, you would do this:
>

>? _BETWEEN(1,2,3)
>? _BETWEEN('B','A','C')
>
>

>
>etc.
>
>You can actually check this code out for yourself.
>
>
>1. Copy and paste the function code into:
>http://etecnologia.net/onlinecompiler/
>
>1.1. Add the function calls to the top of the listing
>
>2. Click "Compile and generate assembly"
>
>3. Download the generated Mydemo.exe to your computer (click the Mydemo.exe -link)
>
>4. Make sure that you have also downloaded and extracted the VFP compiler ZIP file from the same page into the same folder where your mydemo.exe is
>
>5. Go to the VFP compiler folder in MS-DOS prompt
>
>6. Type MYDEMO.EXE
>
>7. See the resulting output
>
>It really is that easy. And now we have added one more of the as-of-yet unimplemented functions (BETWEEN()) to the VFP .NET compiler. Granted, this is an easy one, but the majority of the missing functions are about as easy. And the funny thing is that this is both the egg and the hen, since we are writing VFP syntax to implement VFP syntax. Boggles the mind.
>
>And here's my unit test listing, which may serve as a template (to be improved, for sure). This unit test makes sure that the _BETWEEN() function behaves exactly like the VFP's BETWEEN () function under all circumstances.
>
>

>* Test cases for BETWEEN_E -function (etechnologia replacement for VFP BETWEEN(var1, var2, var3)
>*	NOTES: Run this test in VFP, not the .NET compiler!
>*		   This test covers the most likely data types: numeric, date and character.
>*		   To complete unit test, we should probably add all of other possible VFP data types.
>
>	*Pertti Karjalainen
>	*Northern Lights Software
>	*pertti@northernlightssoftware.com
>	*Original code: 3-26-07
>	*
>	
>	CLEAR
>	SET CONSOLE OFF
>	SET ALTERNATE TO Test_between
>	SET ALTERNATE ON
>	*---all possible test cases (I hope!)
>
>	*numeric:
>
>	_BETWEEN(1,1,1)		&&same, same, same
>	_BETWEEN(2,2,2)		&&same, same, same
>	_BETWEEN(3,3,3)		&&same, same, same
>
>	_BETWEEN(1,1,2)		&&small, small, medium
>	_BETWEEN(1,2,2)		&&small, medium, medium
>	_BETWEEN(1,2,1)		&&small, medium, small
>						
>	_BETWEEN(1,1,3)		&&small, small, large
>	_BETWEEN(1,3,3)		&&small, large, large
>	_BETWEEN(1,3,1)		&&small, large, small
>						
>	_BETWEEN(1,3,2)		&&small, large, medium
>	_BETWEEN(1,2,3)		&&small, medium, large
>						
>	_BETWEEN(2,1,2)		&&medium, small, medium
>	_BETWEEN(2,2,2)		&&medium, medium, medium
>	_BETWEEN(2,2,1)		&&medium, medium, small
>						
>	_BETWEEN(2,1,3)		&&medium, small, large
>	_BETWEEN(2,3,3)		&&medium, large, large
>	_BETWEEN(2,3,1)		&&medium, large, small
>						
>	_BETWEEN(2,3,2)		&&medium, large, medium
>	_BETWEEN(2,2,3)		&&medium, medium, large
>						
>	_BETWEEN(3,1,2)		&&large, small, medium
>	_BETWEEN(3,2,2)		&&large, medium, medium
>	_BETWEEN(3,2,1)		&&large, medium, small
>						
>	_BETWEEN(3,1,3)		&&large, small, large
>	_BETWEEN(3,3,3)		&&large, large, large
>	_BETWEEN(3,3,1)		&&large, large, small
>						
>	_BETWEEN(3,3,2)		&&large, large, medium
>	_BETWEEN(3,2,3)		&&large, medium, large	
>	
>	*Characters
>	_BETWEEN('A','A','A')		&&same, same, same
>	_BETWEEN('B','B','B')		&&same, same, same
>	_BETWEEN('C','C','C')		&&same, same, same
>
>	_BETWEEN('A','A','B')		&&small, small, medium
>	_BETWEEN('A','B','B')		&&small, medium, medium
>	_BETWEEN('A','B','A')		&&small, medium, small
>						
>	_BETWEEN('A','A','C')		&&small, small, large
>	_BETWEEN('A','C','C')		&&small, large, large
>	_BETWEEN('A','C','A')		&&small, large, small
>						
>	_BETWEEN('A','C','B')		&&small, large, medium
>	_BETWEEN('A','B','C')		&&small, medium, large
>						
>	_BETWEEN('B','A','B')		&&medium, small, medium
>	_BETWEEN('B','B','B')		&&medium, medium, medium
>	_BETWEEN('B','B','A')		&&medium, medium, small
>						
>	_BETWEEN('B','A','C')		&&medium, small, large
>	_BETWEEN('B','C','C')		&&medium, large, large
>	_BETWEEN('B','C','A')		&&medium, large, small
>						
>	_BETWEEN('B','C','B')		&&medium, large, medium
>	_BETWEEN('B','B','C')		&&medium, medium, large
>						
>	_BETWEEN('C','A','B')		&&large, small, medium
>	_BETWEEN('C','B','B')		&&large, medium, medium
>	_BETWEEN('C','B','A')		&&large, medium, small
>						
>	_BETWEEN('C','A','C')		&&large, small, large
>	_BETWEEN('C','C','C')		&&large, large, large
>	_BETWEEN('C','C','A')		&&large, large, small
>						
>	_BETWEEN('C','C','B')		&&large, large, medium
>	_BETWEEN('C','B','C')		&&large, medium, large										
>
>	*Dates
>	_BETWEEN(DATE(),DATE(),DATE())		&&same, same, same
>	_BETWEEN(DATE()+1,DATE()+1,DATE()+1)		&&same, same, same
>	_BETWEEN(DATE()+2,DATE()+2,DATE()+2)		&&same, same, same
>
>	_BETWEEN(DATE(),DATE(),DATE()+1)		&&small, small, medium
>	_BETWEEN(DATE(),DATE()+1,DATE()+1)		&&small, medium, medium
>	_BETWEEN(DATE(),DATE()+1,DATE())		&&small, medium, small
>						
>	_BETWEEN(DATE(),DATE(),DATE()+2)		&&small, small, large
>	_BETWEEN(DATE(),DATE()+2,DATE()+2)		&&small, large, large
>	_BETWEEN(DATE(),DATE()+2,DATE())		&&small, large, small
>						
>	_BETWEEN(DATE(),DATE()+2,DATE()+1)		&&small, large, medium
>	_BETWEEN(DATE(),DATE()+1,DATE()+2)		&&small, medium, large
>						
>	_BETWEEN(DATE()+1,DATE(),DATE()+1)		&&medium, small, medium
>	_BETWEEN(DATE()+1,DATE()+1,DATE()+1)	&&medium, medium, medium
>	_BETWEEN(DATE()+1,DATE()+1,DATE())		&&medium, medium, small
>						
>	_BETWEEN(DATE()+1,DATE(),DATE()+2)		&&medium, small, large
>	_BETWEEN(DATE()+1,DATE()+2,DATE()+2)	&&medium, large, large
>	_BETWEEN(DATE()+1,DATE()+2,DATE())		&&medium, large, small
>						
>	_BETWEEN(DATE()+1,DATE()+2,DATE()+1)	&&medium, large, medium
>	_BETWEEN(DATE()+1,DATE()+1,DATE()+2)	&&medium, medium, large
>						
>	_BETWEEN(DATE()+2,DATE(),DATE()+1)		&&large, small, medium
>	_BETWEEN(DATE()+2,DATE()+1,DATE()+1)	&&large, medium, medium
>	_BETWEEN(DATE()+2,DATE()+1,DATE())		&&large, medium, small
>						
>	_BETWEEN(DATE()+2,DATE(),DATE()+2)		&&large, small, large
>	_BETWEEN(DATE()+2,DATE()+2,DATE()+2)	&&large, large, large
>	_BETWEEN(DATE()+2,DATE()+2,DATE())		&&large, large, small
>						
>	_BETWEEN(DATE()+2,DATE()+2,DATE()+1)	&&large, large, medium
>	_BETWEEN(DATE()+2,DATE()+1,DATE()+2)	&&large, medium, large										
>
>
>	*--error conditions
>	_BETWEEN(2,1)				&&too few parameters
>	_BETWEEN(2,'A')				&&data mismatch
>											
>	SET ALTERNATE TO
>	MODIFY COMMAND TEST_BETWEEN.TXT NOWAIT
>RETURN
>
>PROCEDURE _BETWEEN  &&Handled as a procedure call/header for now, until a better FUNCTION header functionality is available
>
>   LPARAMETERS tu1, tu2, tu3
>   LOCAL llRetVal
>   llRetVal = .T.
>   IF VARTYPE(tu1) = 'U' OR VARTYPE(tu2) = 'U' OR VARTYPE(tu3) = 'U'
>      ?"ERROR: Invalid number of parameters!"   && Error handling stub
>      llRetVal = .F.
>   ENDIF
>   IF llREtVal = .T. AND ;
>      ( VARTYPE(tu1) != VARTYPE(tu2) OR ;
>        VARTYPE(tu1) != VARTYPE(tu3) OR ;
>        VARTYPE(tu2) != VARTYPE(tu3) ;
>      )
>      ?"ERROR: Data type mismatch!"   && Error handling stub
>      llRetVal = .F.
>   ENDIF
>   IF llRetVal = .T.
>      llRetVal = .F.
>      IF (tu1 >= tu2 AND tu1 <= tu3
>         llRetVal = .T.
>      ENDIF
>   ENDIF
>   CompareResults(tu1, tu2, tu3, llRetVal)	&&Compare the result from this function with that of VFP function
>RETURN llRetVal
>
>
>FUNCTION CompareResults(tu1, tu2, tu3, llRetVal)
>	?'Function: BETWEEN('+TRANSFORM(tu1)+', '+TRANSFORM(tu2)+', '+TRANSFORM(tu3)+')'
>	?'	Test Result: '+TRANSFORM(llRetVal)
>	?'	VFPFunction: '+TRANSFORM(BETWEEN(tu1, tu2, tu3))
>	IF llRetVal != BETWEEN(tu1, tu2, tu3)
>		?'	NOT OK!'
>	ELSE
>		?'	Ok.'
>	ENDIF
>ENDFUNC
>
>

>
>So, what are you waiting for? Implement your own "pet" function, test it thoroughly and then send it over to etechnologia.net, so that can be integerated and implemented as a truly .NET compatible VFP function for the entire community!