>I never thought about it slowing performance down. That's interesting. As to distribution, I would still need to distribute the source code to all the prgs I change, so distributing the FXPs, too really makes no difference.
>
>This is interesting. I'll have to post on the VarLoop and see if anyone ever tried compiling SBT into one big EXE file.
>
>One question, though. I don't believe we have the source to the existing EXE, so how would you incorportate that into the new EXE?
>
>Thanks,
>
>Michelle

Ah, SBT. I'm out my league here, but I'd say someone probably has.

You'd have to have the source code to incorporate it into the new exe. ReFox would be one solution to get it.

One last note, having the actually source code out there is one thing I wouldn't do in a million years. Too much potential danger.


>>There are some component based strategies that I've used (app files) that actually dnamically link with the main exe. As Craig noted (and I did also in another post), however, using a loader program is a way around kicking everyone off.
>>
>>You do pay some performance penalty by not using an EXE and relying on individual FXPs. Each time a new program is called: Fox has to check its memory to see if the program is already in the program cache; Locate it on the disk if it isn't and then load it from the disk. Further, you make deployment more complex by the need of distributing numerous smaller files (which tend to use up more disk space, BTW). Lastly, there's no guarantee that someone won't be using the module you're trying to replace.