Not at all routinely. But as I've been learning .NET I've been unlearning a lot of things that were things I did in Fox because ... well, that was the best way to do them in fox and I had learned through experience that some things could get cranky if I rethought an approach later on (or took over a project that has not been begun as I would have liked) The parent class thing just popped to mind, since as I've worked a lot with framework design in VFP I have been looking at .NET with that in mind as I try to bring some RAD sensibilities to Strataframe. Of course interfaces, partial classes, extended classes - none of which we have in VFP - are valuable for retrofitting stuff as well. But since none of those exist in VFP, comparing them with the VFP version didn't make much sense <s>

In Fox we routinely subclassed all the base classes. In VFE with had a framework class "c" layer ( from F1 ) and then another subclass of all those classes ( the "i" layer which was the developer mods to the "c" layer and then as those were subclassed as in each app we created an "a" layer of app specific subclasses.

Moving stuff around between class libraries was mostly something I got into on project rescue when VFE developers I was mentoring would decide they wanted to do team development and employ source control . Now it made more sense to organize the classlibs very granular and more vertically than horizontally. (by default all the cursor classes would be in acursors, bizobjs in abizness etc.)

In .NET this rearrangement would have been trivial (and pretty much unnecessary anyway) In VFP it is a project.

As I was developing my first .net app my .net mentor pointed out places where we could retro inherit stuff - business objects for lookups, those based on sql views, those that were CRUD etc when all had originally been based on the Strataframe bizobj. Just delightfully unexpectedly convenient.

My point being it is all different. And some of it is very cool. And actually my greatest pleasant surprise has been in data handling ( but that is also in some ways a tribute to the Microfour framework designers. The most important thing I learned in my Fox days has been to leverage the hard work and talent of others )

>I think the only thing I really have a problem with is the FUD that claims once you leave VFP there is no more data handling, oop, RAD etc.
>
>Can you provide examples where best practice routinely involves changes of parent class? Why would you plan this way rather than (say) using (NET) interfaces? Serious question.