>Three of us.
>
>I've been thinking that it would be cool to be able to have runtimes that do not include anything where the help file says "Included for backward compatibility. Use xxx instead". Wonder if that would speed things up?

Maybe indirectly, but I really don't know for sure. Might produce a smaller memory footprint and that might help, but other than that, probably not.

How practical is entirely another matter. What, from what I know of pcode compilers, would have to be done is that the tokens for the backward compatible stuff would have to be segregated into their own table. If it could be done at all (which I'm not sure of) it might make things slower if any of the old commands were included.

Probably be better to incrementally dump the old stuff entirely. IOW, pare it down version by version.

This is just off the top of my head, so there may be some factors here I've overlooked.

>>>As for a rewrite, I'm amazed that VFP is what it is today based on the tangle of code it's written with. I have full confidence that the Fox team can add the features that are and will be needed.
>>
>>That makes two of us.