>>>Oh, yeah and the VCX is an atom too. IMO a vcx should contain 1 class with rare exceptions.
>>
>>Well, I don't do that. What are the benefits of this, in your opinion? I know one would simply be that when using the class in an app, you can use the only one you need and not bring along a bunch of unneeded code, but what other advantages do you see? I might do that in some situations, but for something like the subclassing of the VFP base classes, I can't see putting each control in its own VCX. Most developers will put those classes in one VCX and actually I've not seen anyone take it to the one class per VCX technique that you mention.
>
>I think there should be some balance. Right now I have a library with all the forms for the complex application and it takes some time to make changes in the class and save it.
>
>However, I don't think I can easily break this library into few more without some other problems.

Exactly the problem. Had you started with them broken out, there would be no need to combine them.