Hi John,

very true. Being a contest, it might only have proved what we already know (that Markus is one darned good programmer). But I think it also demonstrates that the VFP Compiler for .Net is capable (if we assume that the other programmers had at least one or two equally good as Markus) of keeping up with the big boys. And probably also demonstrates the value of having a living, growing language (i.e., the use of TLOCAL). BTW, it sure is nice in VFP code written for the Compiler to have things like LOCAL cString = "Hi World". In the next version, it will be possible to do LPARAMETERS tcString, tnPort = 8888 and the method will provide tnPort with 8888 as a default when no parameter is passed.

Anyway, I get what you write about your company not being in a position to do other than you are doing. That is a very special market. In our market, maintaining acceleration in a curve (have you read "Boyd" ?) is what keeps us succeeding. VFP gives us that advantage, when combined with the 3rd-party framework, libraries, etc. accumulated and created over the years. For us, the VFP Compiler for .Net means keeping those advantages, and gaining the marketing and technological advantages of .Net.

Good luck on your conversion,

Hank

>>He's already done it. Using a very early version, Markus Winhard demonstrated processing speed faster than native .Net languages (while giving the correct result) in a contest sponsored by the German magazine DotNetPro. Here's the translation of the German article: http://translate.google.com/translate?u=+http://indot.net/dotnetprocontest07/dotnetprocontest07.html&langpair=de|en&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&prev=/language_tools Markus used the TLOCAL implementation added by Samuel to the Compiler as part of his solution, if I remember correctly.
>
>
>Thanks, Hank, but the problem with studies like this, is that they don't list the methods used for each technique or the code. So the results are basically meaningless unless you have something to compare them to.