Daniel,


>Mike,
>
>>> Is Visual FoxPro going to be a legacy application development
>>> environment... or will it attract new developers?
>
>> I suppose we'll have to wait for VFP8 before we can accurately guess that,
>> but I can tell you that VFP will not attract new developers as long as
>> enhancment requests that would breathe some new life into the product are
>> being turned down because it would step on the VFP framework vendors'
>> toes.
>
>Your comment can be construed to be offensive to both MS and the framework vendors. AFAIK, no framework vendor raised an objection to the new
>AutoIncrement feature in this forum. I raised an objection to it to be
>called a MAJOR feature because it is of very marginal, if any, value to
>the developers I have worked with. This new MINOR feature will not
>influence my decision whether to upgrade or not.
>
>Daniel

I think more accurately it might be stated that you and Microsoft have a difference between what you define as "MAJOR'. <s> As I understood Ken this feature was THE most requested and as such, from the pov of the developers warranted 'major' attention. From your particular pov it is indeed a MINOR issue I would think, as you've already created a satisfactory approach. My supposition is that MSFT is taking the position that there are enough 'newbie' VFP programmers (they know something we don't? <g>) to warrant the inclusion of the autoincrement.

I think you may be doing what you are suggesting MSFT is doing: That is, making presumptions about what is MAJOR or MINOR. The difference IMO is that MSFT is in a far better position to guage the reality of the presumptions. IOW, their sales and marketing factual information v your observations with your circle of developers. IOW, their vantage point is better...

I do not in anyway mean this as a criticism, just that your comparison is something of an apples & oranges kind of approach.

Regardless, you can safely ignore this new 'minor' <g> feature withough cold sweats at night I presume... <g>