Hi Thomas,

If I said that Addproperty in VFP.Net return .Net types (although there are ways to set type in .Net 4 for dynamic objects), then I was at the least mistaken in the scope of my statement: I had not had the occasion to even test that scenario. What VFP.Net did, however, was return .Net types for classes, something that has to be contrived in IPy.

Hank

>Hi Hank,
>>The reason I am using Boo for development of the tools, and for the initial version of the framework, is that I will not be constrained in the use of .net class attributes, which IPy still can't do, and probably will never do in .Net fashion (for fear of offending the pure-Python constituency, a valid concern from MS's perspective), and because debugging for Boo in SD works beautifully, and for IPy in SD, it's still pretty messy. Plus I like Boo's attitude. If I have to live with someone, I have to like their attitude. <s>
>...
>>IPy returns .Net types with difficulty, using clrtype() and the super properties (double underscores). Boo does it natively. It has that quality of being to-the-point.
>
>Ack on the debug and the attributes - although on the attribute I personally tend to create special C# "baseclasses" - currently manual but that will change.
>
>>Boo does not have the ability to add properties at runtime; however class methods are objects, and most of the time I can get what I want that way. When an object is declared as duck, it can be anything at runtime. E.g., declare an array as duck, and each member can be a different .Net type; and can be passed to .Net framework methods as .Net types -- at least I think I've done that. <s>
>
>Then I probably misinterpreted your meaning on the vfp compiler returning true Dotnet objects to include the usage for addpropertied() fields.
>
>regards
>
>thomas