>>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.
>
>Peronally, I am ready for it.
>

I doubt you are. VFP's DML and cursor engine would completely disappear, and performance (yes, string performance also) right along with it.

>>After all- if you want a language that looks/acts/works like VB, why aren't you using VB?
>
>No offense, but I think this is a completely faulty assumption. VC++, C# and VB will not look/act/work the same under CLR. VB do points well, VC++ will be difficult to use...

Have you looked at the C# and C++ managed code samples? Everything you do (and I mean everything) uses the CLR. All Data access, OS access, HTTP functions, environment manipulation, EVERYTHING uses a common set of components from the CLR. VB, VFP, C++, and C# would all have virtually the same performance. VB only got freethreading and inheritance in VB7 because guess what? They got it for free from the CLR.

BTW, we can use the CLR components from VFP7 through COM interop, so really the only thing we lose by not compiling into MSIL is JIT compilations and the distribution advantages.