>> >If there is no such way, does anyone know of a workaround, besides
>> defining the properties before loading the class?
>>
>> Personally, I prefer to have class property-array as a place to store
>> undetermined number of 'properties' (array is resizeble, isn't it?).
>
>Yes, but that's exactly the reason we use properties instead of arrays -
>array members are accessed by index number, and properties by name. I
>have had a similar question for adding methods to a form
>programmatically (from, say, a builder or a conversion routine), and
>have written to m$.foxwish (or whatever the name was), and got nothing
>back, unless a serial form message is something.
>
>I think the whole idea was to have properties (pre)designed, and that
>adding properties at runtime could lead to... er, unpredictable results.
>Besides, checking every time if a property exists is a kind of
>toothache.
>
>See I've been a nice boy and didn't ask you what do you need it for :)

You would be even nicer if checked first who posted the question.