>Hi all,
>
>Just a little Monday philosphy ...
>
>Have you ever noticed how one person will know a lot about one aspect of VFP and another a lot about some other aspect? This is, of course, a natural by-product of the way we learn, the work we do, the projects we have done, etc. etc. etc. Also, since there is "more than one way to skin a cat", we often find that method "A" works fine for us, so we never even bother to learn about methods b, c, d, etc.
>
>I always find it intersting to see how other developers work. I remember the first time I saw someone do a quick look at a subset of records by using the table, setting a filter, and then browsing. Me? I always do a "browse for" - seems quicker. I would have never in a million years taken the "filter" approach to that simple task. While this example is not the particular point I'm talking about, It is just curious how we each work our own way and become "skilled" in those ways, often with the side-result of becoming ignorant in other ways.
>
>I wonder how this plays in certifications, employment evaluations, etc. ? As an example, In my framework - and in all serious work I have done, I have NEVER used a "Do FORM" anywhere. I always instantiate form classes. My framework is set up to work this way. As a result, I know almost nothing about the VFP Data Environment object - I have my own "DE" object - again, as part of my framework.
>
>Now - I wonder what a potential employer might think about me claiming to be an "expert" in VFP, and yet, not knowing much of anything (or at least having no experience) with "Do FORM" and the data environment? How influenced would they be by the way they work?
>
>On the flip side, I have worked a ton with Local Views, and while by now - most people have, I would be very hard pressed to believe that somebody "really knew VFP" if they couldn't build views, from code, just as fast and thoroughly as I do! If I saw somebody open the view designer, I'd almost automatically write them off as Jr Programmer material at best. So - does that make me a "methodollagy" snob too? I think it probably does.
>
>this gets an extra dimension when talking certification. It seems to me that the problem with certifications in general are:
>1) they test methodollagy as much as results - If I can doe it just as good and fast with Method "A" and they test on method "B" - I'm sunk!
>2) as with all standardized tests - they are as much about ability to take tests as they are about the material itself
>3) they focus (at least ones I've seen) on memorization more than real world problem solving ability
>4) and most importantly - they fail to measure what I consider to be the greatest skills of all - the abilities to GET ANSWERS QUICKLY WHEN YOU DON'T HAVE THEM and TO LEARN RAPIDLY ON THE FLY
>
>no special beef hear, no sour grapes, don't even know why I thought of this just now .... just curious if anyone has any thoughts on any of this.
>
>Thanks!

I agree. Like you my framework is object driven in a data sense. I only use views, and am perterbed that you can't pass an alias to the DE for making and using the pick list for a report. Although someone just said on Fri how to do a report as a quick report and deny the add to DE. This is un tested as of Monday afternoon but I'll try it the next report I have to do.

Finding someone who can do the work and make it appear to function on screen is very valuable. Should that person also have to become proficient with SQL Server ver 4.5, 6, 6.5 & 7 just to say they are qualified in VFP? What about COM?

As VFP gets bigger and can fit into bigger markets, will testing focus on that and oly that, forgetting all that great speed, and short deployment time of the past?

It's M$ we are talking about so I guess that knowing Browse Key for the fastest view of parameterized data will be lost, to somone who is good with ADO or XTML.

Set 2 cents off