>Hi Greg,
>
>they already have dbf support, and have even extended it to > 2G files/records etc. It's really quite advanced at this stage. We have a community support group at Google Groups (google on Google Groups VFP .Net Compiler to find it) where a few of us put up examples. It's not very active: I think everyone is waiting, and that's the problem that Victor is indirectly reflecting, I think. If everyone waits to find out whether it works, where are they going to get the development money? When I bought the CLR Extender (which has already proven its worth in letting me get out a Google Talk VFP app using the xvmpp .net library), my thought was to support that development through my purchase.
>
>There is some information on the next release on the community group; and when I get time to put up a YouTube on converting a VFP form application in the new IDE, I'll link it from there.
>
>Hank
__
Hank,

Yes, I've read something about their TableLayer64.

I was just answering to Mike that the 'type checking' problem is the easy bit

ps: The reason it's not very active is imo that they communicate very little. They may be good programmers for all I know - but there's very little marketing
Their interview in one of the issues of the ut magazine didn't turn me on a bit - but that's just me