I was hastile to relate "Interface inheritance" to COM and most likely what was meant is purely language construct ( like Interface in Java ). Just ActiveX inclusion in this thread triggered a wrong assumption.
Though it would be nice to get some clarifications what is "Interface inheritance" in VFP7 ?

>In fact the thread was so long that I missed your response to that.
>
>Thread #342582 Message #342660
>
>and what was meant is "VFP does not support Interface inheritance", which presumably ( I have a very little knowledge ) something to do with writing COM servers.
>
>
>>>Below quote related to discussion VFP versus VB which took place in March.
>>>
>>>
>>>>Regarding your points about VFP and OOP, I have a hard time believing that VFP supports Inheritance when COM itself only supports limited inheritance; that is, Interface inheritance, and not Implementation inheritance. And re-use is facilitated by Containment and Aggregation. As VB evolves, it seems to me, that more and more of the COM model is exposed in this product, and it is therefore a good choice for HRD. But I am not yet an expert in this area...so I'll copy this note to some of our experts and get their view too.
>>>
>>>He is corrent. VFP does not support Implementation inheritance, but he is taking the same stand that JVP did here not long ago...that implementation inheritance means nothing in COM. The results of that thread were that implementation inheritance is just as important as interface inheritance
>>>
>>>
>>>Could anyone clarify what is meant by "VFP does not support Implementation inheritance". Is it in regard to ActiveX subclassing or something else.
>>>
>>
>>Could you provide a thread number? The statement "VFP does not support implementation inheritance" is wrong. VFP _does_ support implementation inheritance, and in VFP7 will support interface inheritance as well...