>>>Hey, Robert! How about dropping a few secrets now and then? You know, throw the dog a bone to keep him from barking :-)
>>
>>Dave,
>>
>>What Randy B.'s implied in his last few messages hasn't fired up your imagination? It has mine< g >.
>
>Well, let's see.
>
>1) He said we'd get real windows handles on forms, but not real windows controls.

He didn't really say either, as I recall. First, get a window handle on a form isn't really a big deal. I mean you could sub-class a form and with the help of foxtools, have the window handle. But what he said about the real window controls was along the line (again, my recollection) of "I wouldn't go that far".

Now throw into the mix that Randy can't really say much of anything at all. I mean he's working under an NDA. So even if he they were, he couldn't just come out and say so. So his statement has to be taken with a rather large grain of salt.

Given what was demoed at DevCon (Intellisense, which AFAIK, relies on Windows messaging) and given that Randy has stated that automated testing concerns were being addressed, leads me to the conclusion that issues involving the decidedly non-standard way VFP handles messages and objects, is about to change. Yes, one particular possibility is real windows controls, which would alleviate a number of problems.

Of course, this is pure conjecture. I don't know one way or another, and if I did, I certainly wouldn't be writing this< g >.

>2) Also confirmed a way to specify an optional parameter that will allow you to determine the character or characters that break up each line when using ALINES().
>
>Were you referring to something else?

>I should have said "Throw us dogs a sackful of bones to keep us from barking".

Well, it is a dog-eat-dog type of thing< g >.