>Hi Alex, when I see the words "better integrations with SQL Server" I really, really like it.
>
Hola Ricardo,

I read a similar message about a week or two ago somewhere else and they got me thinking...

Well, this might be the key to bringing vfp into the clr family.

10 Years ago, Clipper 5 used a similar approach with its RDD (Replaceable Database Drivers). The idea was that you could swap the drivers used to access the data (gee, it does sound a lot like n-tier and com... I'm telling you, those guys were way ahead of their time with that product).

If you do something similar, in which vfp could have native access to sql data (without ado or other intermediaries or the need to establish connections specificaly), it means that the same could probably be done for the dbc/dbf engine. Practically, you would be converting vfp in a 2-tier application right out of the box, which is also something worth mentioning to the world (read "marketing").

However, this is something that might backfire because I, for example, am not particularly interested in having yet another layer (MSIL) between my apps and the cpu, potentially slowing things down, so if you are thinking of considering this approach, perhaps there should be an option asking the developer if the target will be a clr or a stand-alone (pure vfp) app.

What do you think?

Alex

PS: I come from a clipper background. As I said, I keep thinking that that product was quite ahead of its time. It had built-in objects, inheritance that you could use through a bit of hacking, etc. It was based on quite an interesting model. I think there is still a lot to be learnt from it and you guys should take advantage of that. Please let me know if you're interested in going into a deeper discussion about clipper; I know you're busy and don't want to nag you. ;-)