Daniel,

>The same may true if the classes were copied to each project and you find an error in the root class.

Copying code, in any form of programming, goes against my credo of removing duplicated code.

>I personally believe the readability, fragility, and maintainability of a module or class is much more dependent on the developer's ability to organize his thoughts than on whether or not OOP techniques were used.
>
>We all have seen 50+ Case funtions that were easy to maintain and 10-line program that were next to impossible to decipher. We all have seen the Subclass from Hell that has 100+ custom properties and methods and that is 7 levels removed from the root class.

Yes, I've seen plenty of junk code written in O-O and non O-O.

>We are advocating the same thing. I had a problem with your earlier post because I thought you were one of those OOP is king, everything else is crap evangilist that I encounter too often on this forum. I'm glad to see I was proven wrong!

Ever since the VFP3 beta began and I was writing the VFP O-O book I have always said O-O is not always the best solution to a given problem. I'd estimate that about 90% of the code I do nowadays is in classes. 2-3% spend on reusable UDFs. The rest spent on single use code that is generally procedural code that uses objects but doesn't create any new subclasses. So O-O is the vast majority of what I do.