You gotta be kiddin that "OO is all about analysis and design. . ."!

You've got it entirely backwards - the analysis and design methodology promoted for OO is based strictly on the requirements of OOP programming. You simply cannot do a reasonable job of OOP, and most especially realize the benefits of reuse and such, without doing the recommended style of analysis and design.

You must have had too much wine before you got on here today.

Jim N

>I would submit that "pure-oop" does not exist. OO is all about analysis and design and is language indepdendent. For example, you can employ OO design principles with FoxPro 2.x - or any language for that matter. Designing classes is all about the creation of interfaces that in turn provide direct access to properties and methods that have designated as public. The code contained in the methods is largely procedural.
>
>IMHO, OO is not about creating reusuable code. Rather, it is about having the ability to package code in such a way that makes the code easy to reuse.
>
>Elements like Scan, Seek can't really be classifed as non-OOP. They are language elements in the VFP language. If you have defined functionality that can be reused - and have packaged the functionality in a well designed class - you are employing OOP.