David,


>Jim,
>
>>So WHY do you attribute this to "the optimizer", that is the question?
>
>Because I know of no other thing to credit the optimization to. How else can you explain why l2() is never called in this code:
>
>? l1() or l2()
>
>function l1
>? program()
>return .t.
>
>function l2
>? program()
>return .f.
>
big snip

Come on now...it would be ridiculous for VFP or any other language to continue beyond the OR! This is *not* optimization, it is just the way sensible programming works! Do you think (or expect) that all CASEs of a CASE structure are evaluated beyond the one which 'triggers'? Using your logic most compilers would and those that did not would be credited as having an optimizer!

Give this just a little bit of thought, will you. *Anything* beyond your 'OR', no matter what it is or how long it is or how many parenthesis it might have, cannot affect the result. To call observance of this fact 'optimization' is to look for crediting VFP with something that just isn't so. It *would* be poorly done if it did anything else!

Jim N