Hank,
I would agree with that. After experimenting with both CDBK 3.0 and VMP 3.0, and seeing the demos of VFE, there seems to
be a dictomy. CDBK has a lots of flexibility, at the cost of a lot of putzing. VMP3.0 automates that putzing, which gets you to an app quicker, but you are more tightly bound to their design paradigm which is not easy to code around unless one is willing to do a lot of putzing. The comes VFE, which does everything VMP3 does and generates the app also. More binding yet.
BTW, in looking at the internals of VMP3.0 (many objects with sparse documentation) it seems they may be heading toward the app generator stage also. ???
Jerry

>Jerry,
>
> agreed that codebook is more flexible, but at a great price; its nickname (not my invention) of "codebloat" is not without some justification (speaking of justification: why is my reply about 160 characters wide -- usually I use UTNavigator, but this is on IE4, running 1024x768). VPM is actually simpler to use: if you are going with its interface, it's about 15 minutes to complete a maillist list application, including creating the dbf. Going outside its envelope means learning what happens inside, but I think that's true of all 3 frameworks I own.
>
>Hank
>
>>>Michael,
>>>
>>>it is incorrect that VPM is based on codebook. I use all 3 frameworks, but with regard to VPM, there is barely a line of code I haven't examined. It ain't codebook. It uses GENMENUX as part of it's security system. It has it's own error handling system, which logs all errors to a DBF.
>>>
>>>Hank
>>
>>I would add that VPM's error handling surpasses that of the old Pro2error program. The VPM error DBF stores everything you would want to know about the state of your machine and software at the time of the error. When I was checking it out I think I found a kitchen sink in there somewhere also. Comparing first rattles out of the box, VPM is easier to setup and run than CodeBook but codebook seemed more fexible and simpler. IMHO.
>>
>>Jerry