Reminds me of when I first started using Clipper (eventually leading to VFP) I was coming from a primarily COBOL background. The dynamic aspect of Clipper seemed great on one hand but on the other hand the entire package was much less reliable than COBOL because there were so d***d many runtime errors and testing/debugging became a very tedious affair (still is).

At this stage of the game I don't know what way to turn: Python, C#, Python, C#, Python,C#, Python, C#, RPG, Python, C#, . . . .
Life is so confusing.

>IronPython is .NET... As is IronRuby and they are dynamic.
>
>But... that's still a funky language setup especially for doing .NET stuff IMHO.
>
>Honestly I don't understand the fascination with dynamic languages. Sure there are SOME things that are easier but for the most part statically typed languages just offer so much more support at compile time to produce more robust code without runtime debugging. Especially when you look at C# 4.0 which IMHO provides most of the good features of both static and dynamic languages in a single language interface.
>
>I'm guessing the main feature of VFP.NET has always been the SQL DDL engine if it actually were to work. While that's nice it's hardly a deal breaker IMHO. Get over it, if that's what it is :-}