Mr. Grynchyshyn


My English is not good enough to express, and I am dive into OOP
just for serval months though i'm a 9 year foxer. I just said what
i think, please tell me what i miss.

>> First of all, in OOP the main role is for classes. Such thing as objects containership (as used in VFP for controls on eth form) is not a part of OOP - it is a part of the OOP modelling. So OOP here have nothing to the objects you place on the form and want to add a code to them - in OOP code is added to CLASSES, not to Object (instances of classes).


A 'form' is actually a class define written by using visual tool(form designer)
We can got the actual code of a 'form' with object browser by open
a form then pick 'view class code' .

When launch 'do form...', the fox may generate a class define from *.scx
then instantiate an object. So we can explain why 'do form' has
a subclause 'name', and why the code gen by class browser contain a
property 'DoCreate=.T.'



>>In case of VFP - it allows much more than OOP breaking some restrictions. As opposite, VFP does not have a lot of things from OOP theory. So the OOP is not an issue here at all, and we should not compare it with OOP at all and think if we need the feature you requested using other criteria.


But i think vfp is a good oop language, most oop rule i read from books
is found in it .


>>For you, the main criteria here is comfortable work, as I understood, right?

Yes, it is my origin points. Sometimes, we had to wrote many lines of code in
method of object i.g. a command button, to accomplish complex logic.
So i want to breaking them into serval function to make it good for
understand and maintain. It is not good enough to put the functions in
PRGs because i want the form to be standalone, and it is also not good enough
to add many methods to the form. I want my app be good organized, easy to
maitain...


>>However, think about a huge number of new VFP developers that are not convinient with OOP at all. They even do not know what is classes.

But fox does not oblige everybody use every featrue of it.


>>But this is wrong approach, because in most cases class should be created and re-used on many forms instead of constant adding of code and properties to form components.

In my (many) case, the command button with its long codes, just appear once
in that form, so i don't want subclass from a vfp base class and subclass
again by drag it to form.


>>I hope you can understand now why this feature is not a good one. Even if MS will add it, I can bet it will be deeply hidden so only experiensed programmers will be able to use it (as now you can use it in classes defined in PRG by DEFINE CLASS).

when create a new form with form designer, it means we subclass a form
from vfp form, the new can override its parent and have new
method,property. But why other object can not ?

max.