Jess,

Correct me if I'm wrong, but .NET is a different game as CLR.

Yes, I think .NET technologie is important, but I don't think CLR is the only way to accomplish that. If VFP goes CLR this would probably mean that we would have VB-like VFP. That is certainly not a thing I want.

OTOH, it seems that VFP is able to take advantage of .NET technologie, so I think time should point out how, when and if VFP should integrate more in .NET. IOW, I'm perfectly comfortable with the couse the VFP team is sailing...

Walter,


>Correct me on this if I was wrong, but based on Fox Wiki docs. courtesy of VFUG newsletter, several attendees of the recently concluded VFP devcon in Miami Florida were upset because the conference became a .NET centric rather than VFP centric. This goes to show that vast number of VFPers are not welcoming or not ready to play with the .NET/CLR technology yet. If .NET flops, it is to the advantage of VFPers, but if it's a smash hit, well, VFPers will fill that VFP is just a shadow in the VS box again. Well, I was not able to attend the DEVCON (as much as I want but distance and resources does not permit me though), but to me, discussing .NET technology is timely because it will give us clearer picture of what it is really. It gives us enough knowledge on how VFP will fit to our needs without being left behind by the technology again. What do you think folks?