>Ed,
>
>>VFP does some types of apps well - things that require strong data structure support at a lower level, like routing problems and other things that require varieties of linked lists are not VFP's strong suit, are hindered by VFP's memory model Since much of what I write involves shipping and logistical support, I miss the functionality...I miss my pointers...
>
>Have you played with Cristofs struct class yet ?? I've found it real helpfull for interacting with the windows API. I use it in one project now and i'm really satisfied with the capabilities of it.
>
>What do you think ??

It's easier than rolling your own stuff certainly! It's my pick for the best download on UT.

I have a lot of code in place now that relies on the same functionality as CLSHEAP, and have already implemented classes like NETRESOURCE that offer different functionality than Christof's generic structure handling, so I haven't needed it for my own code. I'd like to see STRUCT use the same memory management API calls that CLSHEAP does and similar data conversion tricks, to eliminate the need for the external file that has to be distributed with STRUCT, but that isn't a major drawback - it's far less intrusive than an ActiveX control, requiring less 'attention' during installation.

Neither STRUCT nor CLSHEAP handles low-level pointers and structures as easily or quickly as languages with native pointer support, and coding to use them would be relatively painful compared to C, at least for me. I'd go nuts if I had to rely on a call to a VCX to allocate each node of a directed graph and manipulate the pointers. In spite of agreeing with Marcus Egger, there are lots of places where life's too short to wait on VFP, and where you need to see more of the underlying metal and framework than VFP conveniently allows.