The hack works great for non-ActiveX classes. But when there are ActiveX objects, the 2 memo fields, OLE & OLE2 are used. OLE is some non-ASCII data. OLE2 appears to be the name of the ActiveX control.

After thinking about it more, I think what I'm doing is not necessarily kosher. I'm not really changing my base class. What I'm actually doing is deleting the base class, and then re-creating it based on my new ActiveX object. So, I'll take back my complaint (but still reserve the right to complain later :-}).


>>This VFP5 implementation of inheritance for ActiveX components seems incorrect.
>>
>>I created a class based on the MS TreeView. I then sub-classed that class. I replaced the MS TreeView with another TreeView in my base class. But all the derived classes still refer to the old treeview.
>>
>>Am I missing anything here? Isn't this a fundamentally bad implementation of inheritance. Is there any way around this? I tried to simply edit the derived class, hoping that this would re-sync the OLE info, but it does not. How the heck do I fix the derived classes?
>
>A hack: open directly the VCX file, and fix the CLASS and CLASSLOC fields for your subclasses, so they refer to your treeview