>>While I think the "do all" frameworks are all excellent at what they do, though perhaps approaching things differently, I wanted an approach that just provided me a basic starting point. I'd prefer to be the one to gussy my app up and I don't like losing that control since it's my reputation.
>>
> Hi Doug,
>
>PMFJI, I based mine on the VFP FFC app object. It's similar to what Craig is describing doing. The app_object is a container that holds individual modules for specific tasks. I borrowed some of their code, added what I needed, and changed around somethings. There are cool little nuggets in there.
>
>Seems to be working well so far :)

Roi,

Cool, and please jump in anytime! I've just been thinking about this stuff and had some notions (odd ones I suppose *g*) and a large part of that is 'ownership'. That is, once one decides to go down Path A it can be difficult to back up and go down Path B. As a result I suppose I have tended to be more cautious than necessary and as a result more than a little behind the proverbial eight ball.

I think that in your case, by tearing the existing FFC stuff apart you've done yout time learning and that is what will pay off in the long run. I want a framework I can easily (relatively speaking) retool for my own needs. For some odd reason I always seem to want them to do something they weren't intended, hence my desire for one like the one I'm currently going to be checking out.

I honestly do not think that there is one right or wrong approach. That's a very silly thought. Each app is unique IMO.

Plus reading Jim & Steve's book. *g*

Best,

DD