>>But for readibility, I don't quite agree on this point - the sample code looks very clear to me. IMO, a programmer should be well-versed with how VFP handles shortcut-boolean-evaluation (since many programmers are NOT well-versed, I can provide additional explanation on request). Again IMO, it should be immediately clear in the sample code that a) DoFirstStep() is executed, followed by DoSecondStep() and DoThirdStep(). b) If any step fails, the next step will not be executed.
>
>Ok, this might be up to one's personal preferences <s>. But I totally agree with you, that a good VFP programmer should know (I do <g>), how an if statement is handled by VFP. But for me, the case structure is a little more clear, since you don't have so many semicolons hanging around, that could be forgotten while coding <g>. IMO debugging is a big plus for CASE, since you don't get from one function's code to the other directly.
>
>Armin
Yes, I agree, especially with the debugging part.
Hilmar.
Difference in opinions hath cost many millions of lives: for instance, whether flesh be bread, or bread be flesh; whether whistling be a vice or a virtue; whether it be better to kiss a post, or throw it into the fire... (from Gulliver's Travels)
