>>Any thoughts on this. If we get CLR we will be one version behind the rest of the VS languages in this option.
>
>I had a fairly long chat with Ricardo about this. I asked about the implications of having VFP compile to the CLR, and, as David reported, the VFP team is open to dialog. Compiling to the CLR would come with costs- as you know VB.NET completely breaks backward compatibility. I don't think that the VFP community wants this. What happens with the CLR is that all participating languages must draw on a common set of resources and are basically restricted to the functionality of the CLR. Although the VFP has stated that they are open to the idea of having VFP use the CLR, I think that they are being diplomatic, and waiting for us to decide ourselves that we really don't want it.
>
>When I arrived here at DevCon, I had mixed feelings about the VFP/CLR thing. Now I am convinced that we don't need/want it. After all- if you want a language that looks/acts/works like VB, why aren't you using VB?

Erik,

Agree 100%!