>This is the best way to discourage people from enterring the playing field because, IMO, C++ is too complex for most programmers, let alone novice programmers...

Then, this is a good thing. If a programmer cannot learn C++ or if he can learn only one langage, then he choose the wrong profession, IMHO. It's like having a plumber that can only fix one brand of toilet and not the others.

Again, I did not say that you should use VC++ instead of VFP, but that what you learn with VC++ about Windows architecture can help you better understand how VFP work under the hood and that make you a better VFP programmer IMHO.

>I used C++ for several firmware projects (and some Assembly too), but I very rarely need it for Win32 development. In general, unless performance is a real isssue, I tend to program at as high a level as possible.

I agree with you. Use the right tool for any given job. I'm doing some development for the Pocket PC environment right now. I can use 2 tools, VB or VC++. VB is really just VBScript on Pocket PC and is buggy. Did I choose to battle the limitations of VB and risk the success of the project because I did know VB and not VC++ at that time? Nope. I bit the bullet and learned VC++, even if it much harder to use than VB.

>As an aside, studies have shown tha1t 30% of programmers will never understand what OOP is all about (I believe I read it first in Code Complete and I know I have read this elsewhere. Having taught Abstract Algebra for Sophomore and Junior University students, I am suprised the percentage is that low. My guess is that a far larger percentages will never be proficient at it. Don't get me wrong, we need all kinds of programmers, not just the geniuses. I used to manage a staff and I trusted about 1/4 of them when it came down to designing a class, an additional 1/2 to maintain and enhance the classes (with supervision), and the rest were not allowed to touch anything at the class level.

I'm not surprised to learn that.