What about having the ability to create components in any of 19 obscure languages that haven't been used for anything but to torture college students for the last 20 years????

Imagine how great it will be to be able to write a com component in Python, use it from a front-end written in Eiffel that will communicate with a web service somewhere in katmandu that was written in Forth or Cobol!!!!!

Even if there were 350 languages that supported the net, 99.999% of all software would still be written using vc or vb. My guess is that as they added inheritance to vb they wanted to do it with some umph and enabled it to inherit from classes defined in vc. The CLR, imo, was a side-effect of implementing this.

Now MS has another feature to push and can look good as a company "open" to third parties.

Alex


>>At DevDays they mentioned that there are 19 languages being ported to run under the Microsoft.Net environment. Apart from the 3 MS languages, they mentioned Perl and Fujitsu Cobol. Somewhat of a let down not having FoxPro on this list.
>>Anybody have any ideas/thoughts on the matter?
>
>Evert --
>
>Hey, last saw you in Palm Springs!
>
>There've been some long threads devoted to this, especially after the Miami DevCon a year ago.
>
>I guess what a lot of us have come up with is this:
>
>If VFP were to become a .NET language, developers would
>LOSE
>backwards compatibility (from losing the next two)
>data handling capability (all done through OS services)
>cool features like macro substitution
>
>GAIN
>a watered down version of VB.NET
>
>
>Instead, what's become clear in the past year, is that VFP is being developed in parallel with .NET, able to produce and consume services for and from .NET applications. This gives us the flexibility of developing 1-tier, 2-tier and n-tier applications. Given the environment, it seems to me a good strategy and one that's very usable for developers. Ken Levy has some good messages here recently also on the topic.
>
>
> Jay