>I was just wondering... I'm trying to resolve a conflict between Xcase and the VFP DBC where it is hard to keep the defined local views in sync with the Xcase model. The solution that I'm currently leaning towards is turning all of my views into programs using the eview utility, and importing them into the DBC periodically to keep the 2 sychronized. It seems that most of my views will be hard to maintain using the View designer, and impossible using the Xcase equivalent. I just want to check this approach against the conventional wisdom of the UT. Does this sound like a good idea?

IMHO, it does. When I last used xCase (version 4), I didn't like the way it handled views. The interface was not intuitive (at least to me) and the fact that it couldn't reverse engineer views from the DBC really ticked me off.

So I went with notion of not worrying about using xCase to handle views. I couldn't get any information about the views anyway (no reports like it has for tables, relations, etc.) so what good was xCase at that point. Having said that, I do like the interface for tables, persistent relations, etc. and I think the reports you can generate for those entities are great.