>>>>>>>>When I write the code I will never have the problem of using the m.dot or not using the m.dot. My coding convention uses the above rules. However, when we use classes that the community has written now we could have potential naming conflicts between variables and fields. So having the compiler enforce the rules is preferable.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Just want to point out that the Hungarian naming convention isn't infallible. While it's a bit of a stretch, it's certainly possible to have a field name lOrange and a variable named loRange. I haven't gone hunting for other examples, since one makes the point, but I'll bet there are others that are plausible.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>In my view, VFP developers should always use mdot where there's any chance of ambiguity. That's even more important for tool writers since they have no control over the naming of fields in tables their users create.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Tamar
>>>>>>
>>>>>>To avoid ambiguitiy as much as possible I tend to use objects instead of simple variables. An object with the same name as a field can be used without m. as long as you reference any of the object members. It also provides you a level for extension methods that can be very useful in daily coding life.
>>>>>>

>>>>>>CREATE TABLE Test (loTest C(10))
>>>>>>INSERT INTO Test Values ("Field")
>>>>>>LOCAL loTest AS Label
>>>>>>loTest = NEWOBJECT("Label")
>>>>>>loTest.Caption = "Label text"
>>>>>>MESSAGEBOX(loTest)
>>>>>>MESSAGEBOX(loTest.Caption)
>>>>>>

>>>>>>Therefore I use classes for repetitive work like for counters or strings:
>>>>>>

>>>>>>* Instead of 
>>>>>>LOCAL lnCounter
>>>>>>lnCounter = 0
>>>>>>lnCounter = lnCounter + 1
>>>>>>Messagebox(TRANSFORM(lnCounter))
>>>>>>* it is better to do
>>>>>>LOCAL loCounter AS Counter OF Utils.vcx
>>>>>>loCounter = NEWOBJECT("Counter","Utils.vcx")
>>>>>>loCounter.DoAdd()
>>>>>>Messagebox(loCounter.Value_toString)
>>>>>>

>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>I would do Messagebox(m.loCounter.Value_toString). That would eliminate any risk of conflict with a table alias/fieldname locounter.value_tostring.
>>>>>*
>>>>
>>>>and you get a tiny performance boost for free. Who doesn't want free speed boosts?
>>
>>A performanceboost of 5 nanoseconds on displaying a messagebox as oposed to 100 milliseconds in readbility degradation. I certainly know what to pick here.
>>mdot only helps in tight intensive loops while a table with many fields is selected. Really that is only 0.01% of my performance concerns. I'd better put effort in avoiding tights loops altogether.
>
>I think you may have intended to address your reply to Mike (he made the point about speed boost, and I think he meant it as a marginal boon to other more important advantages), though I'd say that the advantage of code readability using mdot is definitely way beyond the "100 ms" mark, since you don't have to constantly figure out whether the name you're reading in code is a field name, and alias or a variable.
>*

Not really. There are other ways as mentioned by others to distinguish fieldnames from variables, aliases etc.For example:
In our system, each field in the database is prefixed with 3 characters like Ord_pk, Inv_pk
Variables use a type prefix and is lower case followed by CamelCased name of the variable
Aliases do follow neither

Its all about consistency. There is no need for mdot for readability in our project and only in very few specific cases mdot is used (performance tights loops or scatter memvar cases). In all other cases mdot is not used at all. I personally find it hurting readability.

I often see examples of using mdot, but only then where there can be confusion, IOW not when assiging values. That really does not make sense to me. If you're doing this for readability / consistency then you'd should do it there as well, or else it is only for the purpose of avoiding fieldname/variable mixups.

So for me this boils down to personal preference and hardly a topic that is critical as long as you know the pitfalls.
If I can create a 2 million line of code EMR application being put into a mission critical environments on 5 continents without having this problem no-one should.