>>I have used both vcx/scx and prg's to create objects within Visual FoxPro, for large applications. Each may have an advantage according to a specific need. My preference is to use objects already created as vcx/scx, as this allows a true RAD environment as well as greater ease of maintenance and subclassing IMO.
>
>I'm simply arguing "form over function". I firmly support the notion of "class libraries", "classes", procedure libraries, etc.
>
>I simply think implementing Classes using VCX's and SCX's is clumsy, because you can only manage them using the VFP IDE ... which I do not think is particularily efficient for "pounding out" massive amounts of code.
>
>I have literally "hundreds of Forms and Visual components"; but once I "paint" them, they generally become "static" and are changed rarely. I then spend the bulk of my time cranking out code, with represents maybe 80-90% of my time relative to the time I spend "painting" the visual aspects of a component.
>
>I simply have a problem working with a tool (ie. the Form/Class designer) that is mainly geared towards "rearranging" TextBoxes, and not geared to the efficient production and managment of "hundreds of thousands" of lines of code.
>
>Can all the other platforms be "wrong" re: Two-way programming ?

I'm with you all the way on this. We would be able to use real, high powered editors, if we care to. We could use text manipulation programs written in Perl, or whatever, to modify or create code. The visual tools would become just that...tools, rather than the *only* convenient way to get at the code.

Version control would be much more flexible...most V/C packages work best with text files.