>>Inconsistency, maybe, as other things were done to make internal SQL behave in a TSQL-like manner. So this would be wrong if you have TSQL glasses on - or TSQL was wrong if you have VFP glasses on.
>>
>>If this was the only difference between the two, I might have put that somewhere on the list of warnings, gotchas and other things that make you waste time and slap forehead more often than normal. But given that there are so many other differences (like the awkward way TSQL deals with date arithmetic, the mandatory =1 when checking whether a logical field is true, but then being unable to calculate with those bits unless casted, and then the huge difference in syntax when it comes to quotation marks, apostrophes and square brackets...), this one doesn't worry me much.
>
>You couldn't compare a 'logical column' in TSQL to anything because TSQL doesn't have logical data type. The closest one is bit but it's numeric.

And it's not actually so very numeric either, because
"Connectivity error: [Microsoft][SQL Native Client][SQL Server]Operand data type bit is invalid for sum operator."

I still don't see how trying to add bits is an error in connectivity. After this error, the connection handle is as valid as before. Microsoft doublespeak, I guess. Should have compiled a list, starting in '86... could have published a Microsoft Doublespeaklopedia by now and be rich.