Daniel,

>Charlie,
>
>> Since this code only runs on error # 1884, this sounds like a good
>> technique. However, there are still multi-user issues to think about (I
>> think).
>It's already taken care of.
>
>> And I have to write this code. No matter what I write, it isn't as
>> good as native (the key's in the header) support.
>I am very confident in my own abilities. I am certain that some of the code I write is better than what's native to VFP, VB, Java, or whatever. Not all, but some. When 50 users of a 80,000+ lines of code application discover a total of 2 bugs in 3 years, it's pretty damn good quality work.
>
>I take pride in my work and I am sure the VFP team feels the same way. I will not use the new AutoIncrement feature because I know my function works exactly as intended. I expect the native AutoIncrement to work exactly as the VFP Team intended but their objective may be different than mine.

Exactly! I don't think that anyone will be forced to use the VFP version. Shoot.. I'd be surprised if you won't be able to override it with your own.