><<
>When I build a view 'x' based on table 'y' and then modify the structure of table 'y' does view 'x' break?
><<
>
>Yep... And as far as I know, the same behavior exists in 7. This is one of the reasons I think RV's are a bad idea...


Does anyone know WITH ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY if this behaviour still exists in 7?

>
><<
>I ended up buying Stonefield to solve this problem with VFP 5 and 6.
><<
>
>If one is using RV's, SDT is a MUST HAVE TOOL. Unless you know how to hack the DBC and recover, SDT is the only prayer you have of not not losing your view definitions.
>
I do not use RV's with remote data I use SPT.

Even using Local Views .. SDT becomes a must have tool. I was forced to maintain a medium scale application that relied on Local Views. It was very difficult to alter table structures. I had to re-do every Local View.

Stonefield is extremely well made. However, like any data dictionary, it slows down processing to a certain extent.

Extremely fast database operations (with native data) is the purpose of using VFP.By relying on ANY data dictionary you are crippling VFP's #1 selling feature.

I am leaning towards building my own "View Maintenance" system so that I am not "required" to use Stonefield.


>I should have mentioned this sooner in some earlier threads. Thanks for bringing this up.