>>My latest project involves 4 programmers, and we've opted to use PRGs for many items and a PROC file for a 'bunch' of small functions used repeatedly. We've found it's easier to keep the code up-to-date for all of us. Because of some system limitations, we have to send our code to one person who manages the Visual Source Safe, so checkouts are not totally reliable.
>
>I think the question was rather "classes in VCXs vs classes in PRGs" than "classes in VCX vs func/proc in PRGs".
>
>I totally agree that funcs/procs are still the easiest way to go for many small problems. I don't really see a good reason for defining classes in PRGs. Although, I heard that many programmers are doing this. So, I would like to hear some reasons for it.
>
>Vlad

Vlad,

One reason is that the memory required for PRGs is significantly less than VCXs. This is something that I had heard, but never tested until now. I created a simple class with one custom property and one custom method. Using SYS(1016), I measured how much memory was used by these objects. The PRG used approximately 11K less than the VCX. I test this twice, re-starting VFP each time with the same results.

In general, I use both, depending strictly on what the class is designed to do and work with.

George