Ken,

>
>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.

You are correct. There are many ways to do do things in VFP. That does not mean one is right and another wrong..unless one produces the desired results and the other doesn't. Often, there are several ways to get the desired result, and many times there is a more efficient way than how we are doing it. Every few months I sit down with the VFP Language Reference (or Hacker's Guide). It is good to review everything...and occassionally I find an easier way to do things that I've been doing. I wouldn't say I was ignorant of other ways...I just need a refresher.

>
>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?

I don't think that should matter. If you're good, you can easily adapt to other styles.

>
>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!

Not necessarily. If you know your stuff, then you'll recognize method "B". It may not be the preferred way, but you'll be able to figure it out.

>2) as with all standardized tests - they are as much about ability to take tests as they are about the material itself

Also true. The Certification team recognizes this.

>3) they focus (at least ones I've seen) on memorization more than real world problem solving ability

This will NOT be the case with the VFP 6.0 exams.

>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

The tests are purposely being designed in such a way that some guy just out of programmer's school can't pass them. You will need real world experience. If you want to see some of this, go take the System Design and Solutions exam. It is tough.

Now, with the VFP exams, Microsoft has done something that they have never done before...VFP people are writing many of the exam questions. This was done at DevCon and was open to all DevCon attendees. Now to be truthful, I'd much rather get questions written by someone like me than those written by Jim Booth. But, I think you'll find the questions fair and on the mark. You should plan to take the beta exams. You'll be able to comment on every question and the the exam as a whole...and you're comments will be read and considered.

>
>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!