I didn't even want to include that quote in my post :-)

Yes, clearly the author was mistaken.


>I agree, a very good set of articles. Of particular interest was the author's statement that "...languages that will be able to work with the .Net class libraries, Common Language Runtime, and Visual Studio.Net ...include the languages that ship with Visual Studio, of course--C#, Visual Basic, Visual C++, Visual FoxPro, JScript, and SQL." [p. 17, emphasis mine]. Until the official news from DevCon was discussed here, I was prepared to believe that perhaps VFP would support the CLR after all; now it appears that perhaps the author was simply enumerating the tools that ship with VS and may have made an assumption about VFP. Nonetheless I thought it was gratifying to see VFP mentioned in an article like this.