Jim,

>SNIP
>>
>>Doesn't VB need to have its variables all pre-defined or does variant work sufficiently close enough to VFP's ..ehrrr.. 'relaxed' <g> approach to variable management to make it possible? I'm thinking that macro substitution would make VB choke a little. Perhaps not as I'm not that familiar with the product...
>
>Maybe that's why there is pseudo typing support in VFP7?!?!?! Small steps getting ever closer??? VB--->OO...big step getting closer?????

Well, one thing that you benefit from after programming with a Fox product for some 14-15 years straight is that you get a sense of just how marvelously the developers like Eric Christensen and now Calvin Hsia have managed to bring what really is a sort of stodgey old product into the future.

VFP is not your father's FoxBase+!! <g> And we've not gotten a quick coat of new paint on an old product either.

So.. With that kind of development history I wouldn't be AT ALL surprised to see VFP compile to true binaries at some point. Or, perhaps those parts that don't have macross in them with a stub translator program to handle the macro stuff.

Who knows? But, one thing I have learned is to not underestimate these folks.

I think that all too often these kinds of discussions emminate from the notion that the product is static in nature. It's not. It's very dynamic. We do the same with our national budget in that we don't always factor in the notion that the economy is not static nor a 'closed' system where taking from one area automatically adds to another, or visa versa.

Nope.. VFP's real strength is its flexibility IMO.

>>
>SNIP
>>
>>Then I suppose we'd all start squabbling over the name..... <g>
>
>We could probably agree on "Thing".

I disagree.....

*chuckle*

<g>

>
>>
>>One thing's for sure. If anyone could make it happen Calvin could..