>I guess "very easy" is all relative. You have to use around five lines of code, I have to use one.

you do :

do form myform name oform linked noshow to myvar
do some stuff
oform.show()

I do:

set claslsib to mylib
oform = create("myform")
do some stuff
oForm.show()
myvar = oform.xRetVal

not that different amount of code wise - I count 14 words to 15 - AND my form is still alive if I wanna reshow it

> IF you disagree completely, do a search here on how many people have to ask how to get a return value from a vcx form, and how many different common suggestions there are, most involving ideas like parameter objects and/or custom properties. All unnecessary with scx forms.

That is your worst argument yet - geez - do search on how many people need to know how to hide the main VFP form - or build an index - or query a SQL table - or open a table exclusive - just because lots of people don't know how is no indication of complexity.

>Why are you even using DE and SPT in the same sentence? What does one have to do with the other?

let me rephrase - you are in a VFP-Database-less SQL set-up - what good is your data environment - if it's not - why have to have a DE for VFP tables and something different for SPT cursors? my datamgr classes handle both transparently - and are instantiated at form load like your DE - the differnece is I have massive control over every little substep of the data loading process.


>I can control that in my form code anyway. Can you cite an example where this would be useful (I mean an example that I can't counter with a DO FORM alternative >that's just as easy)? I have never had the need for this, and if I did, I would use the NOSHOW clause.

you know - you act like adding more and more clauses to one line of code is superior to 2 or 3 short lines of code - I don't agree with that


>Whether it's in your implementation code or your framework, there are still two pieces of coupling from instance to class, where DO FORM only requires one, because the form and file name are the same.

and for this you pay by having several times the number of files to deal with ... to me that is a MUCH bigger issue.


>No, I mean that no matter what you name your forms, you can't see the names from Explorer, and if you decide to move a form definition from one location to another, you have to create (or already have) a new VCX to house it.

I have no reason to see my form names from explorer - I know what they are named and what classes they are in. I would suggest that if you often have to go to explorer to see your form names, you might want to consider a better naming convention.

We obviously have differnt ways of working and different opinions on what is important or not to us at design time - let's agree to disagree and drop this

KBM