>>I'm not sure any possible "VFP tech in SQL Server" would be enough to cause MS to hold back source code. These days various open source DBMSs (whether SQL or otherwise) run at scale and under loads never encountered, or even dreamed of when the VFP SQL and ISAM engines were written. If someone wants to know how to write a data engine they'd be better off looking at one of those projects.
>>
>>Off the top of my head I can't think of any aspect of VFP that's especially unique or technically desirable such that MS would want to keep its source proprietary.
>
>I always heard it was Rushmore that was the big deal. Regardless, I also heard that the VFP code was a mess inside because it was the product of 20 years or so of evolution. I specifically remember hearing that one of the reasons they didn't want to improve the Report Writer was because the code was such a mess. It's not an accident that a lot of what we got in improvements was done via extension.
>
>Tamar

I heard years ago it was Rushmore that would keep them from open-sourcing it too.