>George,
>
>Is there any word from the MS VFP development team on VFP's future with its inability to handle ActiveX controls that support containership?
>
>I would also love to see VFP be able to handle those great pointers and structures used or returned by API calls. VB can handle them, why can we?
>
>I guess I am asking for too much, hah!

Juan,

I'm not the person to ask about this. I don't have as much (hardly any) communications with the VFP team. There are others here who are probably better qualified than I to answer. However, it doesn't stop me from making a guess and since it's (Foot In the Mouth) Friday < g >, I'll take a stab.

I mentioned earlier that, from what I know, VFP's processing of Windows messages isn't "standard". It seems as if the main VFP window receives all messages directed to an individual form, rather than at the form level. I'd guess that one of the reasons for this is that VFP's native controls are standard either. Therefore, I'd have to conclude that we probably won't see any changes in this area, and that the problem with ActiveX controls of this type is likely to continue.

Now as for structures, I think that's more doable. What would really be nice would be a native STRUCT type that would have only properties and no methods. Given, however, VFP's internal memory handling, however, gaining access to pointers might be another story. One other area in the API arena that would be also nice would be the ability to pass a method to an API function for callback functions. This too, unfortunately, might be too much to hope for.

Of course, this is just IMHO. I could be wrong.

George