Peter,


< snip >
>
>I still stick to this list:
>1) A macro occasionally gives better performance (speed) than eval().

Agreed.

>2) A macro occasionally improves readabillity.
>3) A macro occasionally improves code maintenance.

Never seen such situation. Can you provide some examples?

>4) A macro occasionally is the only way to accomplish a task.

Agreed.

>
>But maybe you like this list more:
>1) Macros are the only way to parametrize a keyword in a command.

Agreed.

>2) Macros are only the second to best way to parametrize a name expression in a command.

Hah? Why would you want parameterize name expression? If name expression can be used than why would you need macro substitution?

>3) When used as argument in a loop construction (like a DO WHILE and a SQL-query), there's a fundamental difference in the way that a macro and an evaluate() are handled. The functional requirement is therefore decisive.

Agreed.

>4) Evaluate() is not Rushmore optimizable, whereas the use of a macro leaves that possibility intact.

Agreed.

The macro substitution has its place in VFP coding when used properly.