Hi Rich,

>Disregarding the fact that VFP is no longer supported, how does VFP compare to a language like Python for ease of use and what one can do with it?

I have a very limited and specific experience with python. Back in 1999-2001, it was not really the shining star it has become. But as a VFP-er I felt immediately comfy with its pedigree:
- an interpreter à la fox (its speed was really on par, not faster, not slower either),
- a syntax that is sufficient near you really forget you are coding in a distinct language after a couple of weeks.

But at that time, a lot was missing that fox provided, an integrated environment that provided UI and data-centric widgets including our beloved grid and browse...

At that time, early years 2000s I used python to develop html-server software. It really shined at this, as others do as well. The support for web-based dev was already plentiful. Spent two years with it and loved it really. But I never produced the kind of desktop apps that I could deliver with VFP. Way too much work and no solution for highly productive business apps.

Now, we are 2023. My take for what it's worth:

Python has mutated from the also-ran interpreter it was during the 90s, along with VB, fox, perl, lua and others into an absolutely massive eco-system. An eco-system which is catering to the needs of very different kind of users including:
- startups with an idea that try to deliver fast, mostly large or demanding Internet-centric apps :-)
- data scientists and artificial intelligence experts,
- hard-science, from physics to biosciences.

Of course you can produce literally anything with python. Much in the way you could use C++ or dotnet. But the latter two groups of users - data scientists-AI and hard science - are now the communities that are driving the python bus so fast and hard. IT experts are not the driving force behind this communities.

Although these "open source" communities tend to share some passion for technology. They are generally driven by the stuff they do with python. Not by the language itself. As the people who were behind our fox communities. The zen of python (below) could have been written by our community:

Beautiful is better than ugly.
Explicit is better than implicit.
Simple is better than complex.
Complex is better than complicated.
Flat is better than nested.
Sparse is better than dense.
Readability counts.
Special cases aren't special enough to break the rules.
Although practicality beats purity.
Errors should never pass silently.
Unless explicitly silenced.
In the face of ambiguity, refuse the temptation to guess.
There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it.
Although that way may not be obvious at first unless you're Dutch.
Now is better than never.
Although never is often better than *right* now.
If the implementation is hard to explain, it's a bad idea.
If the implementation is easy to explain, it may be a good idea[...]

"practicality beats purity": this makes this python language is a distinct kind beast. Not really that fast as language but a host for an incredible number of libraries, all of them "open source", most of them associated with comfortable licenses such as MIT, Apache, BSD and others.

Data science and python are a natural match. And most AI expert are experts in this language as well. Python is also a decent environment to develop demanding web apps. In these fields python is highly productive. But, when it come to business or desktop apps, it is certainly not a better fit. Just an alternative among many others (java, dotnet, ....).

These are my two cents, no more! By the way, most python cost less than two cents, it's free.

WOW, Daniel!
Thank you so much for your detailed writeup on Python. You certainly gave me all the info I needed. I've just absolutely LOVED Fox all these years, and it was with sad regret that it might be time to put it to bed already. I guess I'll be spending the foreseeable future in getting a handle on Python. Thank you again so very much.

Rich Murillo