Hi Nancy,
YOu misunderstood me. I thought your article was very good.

My main point is that for many VFP coders VFP is the ONLY language they know. With no prior CS training or experience the Dark Side of the Moon is all they know. Stepping from VFP to a language similar to C++ when all you've ever known is VFP will be a programming-life-ending experience for all but the best of them.

Also, you article had nothing to do with my decision to leave UT. The decision has been made that all new development will be in Oracle with a browser front end, with the occasional use of Java. This, I understand, is due to several things: 1) the XP wizard, 2) the new EULA provisions which give MS the 'right' to add or remove what ever software it wishes, 'for the sake of security', 3) the outrageous License 6 fees, 4) the constant upgrading with support die off for previous releases to force the upgrades, 5) the never-ending security problems, with patches fixing patches which break old patches,etc..., 6) stability, 7) we can't put our data on passport servers for a variety of reason, 8) toll booths on .NET, 9) the coming DRM and micro-licensing of features, etc....

I am told that we are freezing at our current OS versions, which is Win95 for many boxes, Win98SE for a few, and Win2000 for the new Dells that are coming in. VFP6 will be our last version of VFP, and I will probably retire maintaining the VFP legacy code. We basically have no issues with VFP or our current versions of WinXX - I know where most of the land-mines in VFP are, and the usual MS mantra applies: reboot, reinstall or rebuild.

Since Oracle will be our primary db tool we are getting support from another site.

So, Nancy. Nothing personal BTW, I did detect the enjoyment you were having exploring linked lists! That is refreshing. It's what makes me want to code!
JLK


>Hi, Jerry-
>
>Thank you for taking the time to write a post to which you obviously gave a lot of thought.
>
>>I just receieved the latest issue of VFUG. It included a fine article by Nancy Folsom. She used the concept of "Doubly-linked lists" to illustrate coding in C# as part of her self-training.
>
>< snipped details for the sake of quoting brevity>
>
>>UT is a great forum. It's been nice 7 years, but it's time to say goodbye.
>
>Apparently my modest article and your departure are linked in some way. I don't understand how and why, though. And I'm not sure what, if anything, I can say to smooth some of the rough spots. Therefore, I'll just try to do my best to reiterate one of my points in the article, and my own philosophy when it comes to VS.NET.
>
>First, I chose linked lists as an example to learn about the concepts of interfaces in general, and enumerable collections in particular. I'm sorry that for you the example--linked lists--is too basic to have been compelling. I will admit to having had quite a bit of fun with it after having spent 17 years "doing data." I enjoyed revisiting a comp sci concept that I hadn't used in quite a while. Second, the linked list example was suggested to me by someone doing C# coding who needed a linked list. Of all the wonderful Framework classes there isn't a linked list and while we in the data-centric world have little need of them, other programmers doing other types of programming do.
>
>This leads me to explain how I've come to the decisions I have to even look into VS.NET, and to look into C# in particular. Ken Levy has recommended that Fox developers look at VB.NET if they're going to look at VS.NET at all. I understand and respect his recommendation, but I don't agree with it _as it applies to me_. Here's why, very simply. When I tried to learn to make VS.NET do the things I do commonly and easily in FoxPro, I got frustrated and made little progress. I specifically chose C# because it _didn't_ look like anything like FoxPro. It actually made it easier for me to learn things in VS.NET.
>
>FoxPro insulates us from a lot of nitty-gritty details, or implements CS concepts in non-standard ways, such as events. That's not a criticism, BTW, but it is a fact. So, to learn another language, one that has been designed by a world-class language designer, I needed to strip down some of the ways I've thought about basic CS concepts, and rebuild from the ground up.
>
>When I have FoxPro-able projects to do, I will likely do them in FoxPro for the foreseeable future. I feel strongly that FoxPro is vibrant and will help me keep my clients current in technological possiblities _for a long, long time_.
>
>When I use VS.NET, I'd like to use it in a way that's different from what I do in FoxPro. Barbara Paltiel (editor of VFUG) has been kind enough to allow me some space to write up my own, personal exploration of my efforts. In all their gory details. :)
>
>I'm sorry that it's apparently caused you some consternation, and I welcome your comments and any technical corrections, of course. For example, some people who have looked at it have wondered why one can't simply use a Queue or Arraylist construct. Others might wonder about thread safety. I changed the IEnumerator class to private based on a comment. All are good questions and ones that prod me in the direction of learning just a little bit more.
>
>Whether or not your opinion remains the same after reading this, I hope that at least I will have expressed a bit of my thinking clearly.