>But if you studied it, you'd come to the conclusion that implementing design patters is way easier in VFP than in .NET, because VFP is about data and thus meta-data.

>Walter, it's impossible for me to get angry at someone who can say this with a straight face. I hope for your sake that you can stay with VFP for the rest of your career.

I'm glad you feel that way.

>Oh, and not that it makes a difference, but I've read all of Celko's books. I don't always agree with him and was a little disappointed in his updated SQL Puzzles book. But I have all of them, and I try to keep up with his online interviews.

And do you understand his strenghts and weaknesses ?

>Therefore your solution was flawed already before I even saw it.

>Your approach is a really odd form of a circular argument. You set out with the premise that certain solutions are record oriented "qua" record-oriented, and that since they were solved by you in VFP with a record-oriented approach, you can disqualify all other attempts as being inferior. It reminds me of arguing with people about God.

Tsstsst.. You really have a difficulty to get the message heh?? You ignore the fact that there are such things as RECORD ORIENTED problems vs SET ORIENTED problems. So you conviniently ignore the there is a difference and therefore come to the conclusion there is not difference in how they should be solved. That really surprises me from someone like you kevin, I really thought you were more knowledgeble than that.

And about people about arguing about god. There is not much to argue about something that does not exist, except in peoples individual minds.






>Kevin