Hi Bob,

I agree with you.

I really don't care at all how someone chooses to implement their 'frameworks' or projects or whatever. What I was trying to point out was that it looked to me like lots of the OOP advantage was negated by the approach that *many* people say they practise. I also said that I felt that OOP was not a *major* contributor to the RAD equation.

Cheers,

Jim N

>>To me, OOP has little to do with "RAD", especially when I read the virtually all here who do lots of VFP with their own (or bought, I suppose) frameworks tend to make a copy of their 'base' framework classlibs for each separate project. At the very least that suggests some apprehension regarding the quality of their 'base' classes. This also obviates the benefit of inheritance, since each separate project would have to have their specific classlibs 'upgraded' and the project re-compiled in order to implement desireable changes.
>>
>
>Jim,
>
>Just because someone is using a tool incorrectly doesn't mean it is bad or wrong.
>
>Most quality frameworks have three levels...
>
>1. The code for the framework.
>
>2. The global changes which are in all applications.
>
>3. The application level changes which affect a single ap.
>
>If someone is taking 1 and 2 parts of their framework to implement 3 they are doing it wrong, or it is a bad framework.
>
>Thing is, in VB to do the above, you HAVE to cut, copy and paste.
>
>BOb