>>Do you know if this will have any effect on
>>the language, specifically backwards compatibility commands and functions? I
>>still think that some of the backwards compatibility items are at the heart of
>>some problems making VFP a better player in the VS environment.
>
>As pure speculation, I'd say not. I don't have any information one way or the other on it. What items did you have in mind, just out of curiosity? (Some day I'll figure out how to spell that word....)

As an example only, there's a lot of baggage related to the READ/Foundation READ, like the WindowType 2 and type 3 support for READ and Foundation READ stuff ported in from the bad old days. Keeping it there can't be making maintaining the VFP UI code any easier.

I'm not looking to start a war with the people who've decided to stop their conversion of FP apps with functional ports; I just think that continuing to support these in each new version of VFP is counter-productive, because it leaves an incentive not to make things behave better in the OOP environment. VFP5 was a fine, stable platform for people with Functional ports, and I for one would not be upset to not see continued support in future versions of the language.