>Refox still can decompile the residual VFP shell that usually has little useful content. Hooking of the dll still is possible but there are ASM thwarts and it's an awful experience trying to piece the VFP code back together, especially loops. Performance can be slightly improved for simple expressions.
>
>>> Or has the compilation to machine code eliminated some of vfp's shortcomings like the heavy perf hit for calling functions/methods when compared to languages like C#/Java/native C(++) ?
>
>Depends what you're doing- most functions now are in a C++ dll, plus you can inline C++ or ASM which is how we do AES encryption: the C++ is inlined right there in the VFP procedure and gets compiled as native C++ when Make is called to generate the dll.

One of my beefs with vfp is that if you refactor parts of less than 10 lines into methods/functions just the call overhead sometimes more than triples the time neededto execute. Bad for expressions often re-used in SQL (esp. multi joins if in where or join as temp indices will be created) or object access paths used very often - leading to chin-ups trying to rape preprocessor directives (which sounds crazy in english but is a german figure of speech).

I had asked Aleksey ages ago about an inlining option for functions via keyword and his response was along the lines of "nice idea, but tons of effort"