>>>> Also include m. at least for performance issue in VFP7 :
>>>
>>>Hi Cetin,
>>>Can you tell me what sort of performance issue is involved with the "m."?
>>>
>>>Thanks
>>
>>If you don't include m. in for loops VFP7 is slower than previous versions (documented somewhere).
>>Cetin
>
>Hi Cetin,
>
>
>I started another thread 647967to ask more about this, and people over there seem to say that using the m. is slower (someone even said 1/3). But Craig ran a test that seemed to indicate that using the m. in a for loop was negligently slower.
>Now I'm really interested in this subject.

Bill,
I'm the liar of docs :) I didn't run any tests (and even can't think of a good test that could say clearly say this is true or false). I read the fine prints more than other parts and I clearly remember this was somewhere in docs, maybe KB. Unfortunately I can't locate it once more. Personally blindly thinking it's true as I remember it was coming from fox team with a test showing the case. Till I can prove wrong myself I believe it (personally:)
Cetin