>I disagree...
>
>Just because a product natively supports a behavior, it does not mean that behavior is appropriate to use all of the time. VFP supports active documents. However, when are active documents the correct choice? VFP has native data. However, at some point, native data is not the correct choice.
>
>This is not a VFP vs. VB thing. Rather, it is another way to look at things.
>
>And no, if VB all of a sudden supported implementation inheritance, you would not see people all of a sudden abandoning composition for inheritance....
>
>
>
>
>>I agree, John. But the point is, if I am developing middle tier components with VFP, I am going to use everything in my arsenal. If I'm doing the same with VB, the same applies. VB developers don't have all the advantages of OOP, so it doesn't matter to them because they don't know better. If VB supported inheritance and all the rest of the great tools that VFP has, you can damn well bet you'd see tons of subclassing on all the tiers.
>>
>>If suddenly I became a VB developer and was forced to never use VFP again, I'd probably find a way to develop middle tier components without having to rely on inheritance and what have you, but, Boy, would I be hatin' life!

I think we beat this one to death. You hold it, and I'll get a gun to make sure it won't try rise up again...