Hi!

>>Well, as I said I would like to see who and when sent them to MS, as well as the answer from MS.
>
>No one needs to send them. We are paying attention, you know. :-) As far as an answer goes, you'll never get one. That would be the equivalent to announcing features for the next version.
>

I did not meant the answer about if ceratain wish will be implemented. I did meant only the answer from MS about this list and showing mnore attention to wishes list. For example, tell, is it good to keep sending wishes in such form or change the form of wishes? Some guidelines for writing wishes? What topics in VFP we should not touch at all, say 'forget - this will never be implemented'? Why MS cannot do that? Without that it looks like MS ignore the wishes lists.

>> There are many quite simple things in that list that are not implemented. I would like to know why?
>
>What appears to be simple may not be. Even simple features can break existing apps, can be harder to implement than it appears, etc. Even simple things take VFP team resources, which are finite, and may not be of benefit to the majority of our customers.

Well, the idea is simple. If there is a collision when fixing something, make a new feature in VFP. For example, instead of fixing Grid reconstruction behavior, make a new, lighter, grid class that will not be supposed to be as universal as old FoxPro Browse window. Instead, new grid control will be much better for programming in VFP applications. The same is for all other controls.

In addition, I see no reason to do not include the support of late binding of VFP code to ActiveX events. If we can do this through VFPCOM.DLL, why not build into the VFP this functionality?

Being programmer on Assembler and Delphi, I can say for sure that certain wishes have no difficulties to implement. Thus it also looks like MS push VFP only into the direction that they want. Not listening and implementing quite good and useful wishes is a way to make such opinion about MS. The things added and improved in the VFP7 are quite good, but why not fix old problems that come from VFP3 across all versions?

Do you see my point now?

Thanks for listening.