Mike,

>MS is not going to maintain 2 version of VFP so we can have Backwards Compatibility and CLR. They wouldn't even do this for VB!

There are already "two versions" of VFP in the sense that you have a limited-syntax version for compiling MTDLL's.

>... if VFP goes CLR, you'll have no choice to CLR (except for using older versions of course).

A more Fox-ish way of approaching it would be to make it a compile option, giving us extreme flexibility, IMO.

>For all I know (and someone correct me if what I know is wrong), VFP going CLR could even force it to give up its local database.

The way I see it, the data commands would have to be mapped over to ADO+ or SQL objects, which could then of course use the OLE-DB driver to handle fox data or SQL Server. The ADO+ and SQL objects (and maybe the XML parser) ARE the local data engine for .NET and therefore for CLR.