I actually had no idea how the test would come out when I simply tried to compare the VFP code with what I thought was a similar test in C#. I wasn't trying to "prove" anything. I was seeking an answer and was surprised by the outcome.

I also had no idea in advance how the string test would come out and was even more surprised by the result.

As to the difference in random functions I asked if anyone had a different test that would be more fair as I knew the functions were probably different so if you have equivalent C# code that would compare fairly with the VFP I would like to try it.

Since you are big on open source, cross platform etc I'm kind of surprised you leap to the defense of VFP.

I don't have an ax to grind against VFP. After all the time I worked with it I got pretty familiar with what it would and would not do and then got bored with it. I will never argue tech points with my betters.

I am reporting my own experience of this stuff, and welcome correction and education.

I will,however, remain clear about my motives. "spiteful antagonism" is certainly not among them. <s>


>Apart from the fact that your C# sample uses integer math via random.next(), you're also getting the wrong answer when overflow inevitably occurs. ;-) Whereas the VFP sample is using floating point math and will throw an error if overflow occurs.
>
>Not sure why this sort of trickshot is re-ignited along with the spiteful antagonism that we'd managed to avoid for a while. We all know it's possible to generate examples that "prove" one language is better than another. for example, it's still easy enough to kill a C# app (and the machine it's on) by generating vast datasets that spooled invisibly to disk in FP for 2 decades in my experience with little effect on performance. So? People who need spooling can continue using VFP. People who don't perceive spooling value can move to C#. It's a big wide world with plenty of variability, thank goodness. Seems to me that the OP was asking a question particularly about open source options, not as another opportunity for NET people to start being "amused" (which in my experience has turned into a formulaic label for gratuitous nastiness showing anything but humor).