Hi Jim

You certainly have the right to opine ;) You do understand that if you do this...

select max(field1),field2 from table group by field3

field1 field2 field3
3 A 1
2 B 1
1 C 1

That the results of the query will be wrong?

3 C

I'll bet most people would expect that field2 in the result would be A.

>Hi Mike,
>
>I expressed that I felt that a different implementation would have been better IN MY OPINION.
>Sergey, it seems, takes issue with my opinion. So when challenged, I reply. I still feel strongly that fixing the bugs and addressing ANSI compatibility were two separate issues.
>
>I long ago in the thread acknowledged that we get what we get and though what we got is not what I'd like, that's tough (for me).
>But maybe this discussion will give the VFP Team pause on the next such revision decision.
>
>
>>Jim
>>
>>Why argue about this? Was it better to be stuck with a design that could give incorrect results since Foxpro 2.x? Just because something worked the way it worked for a really long time doesn't make it right.
>>
>>They did give a way to maintain compatability with a backward design.
>>
>>>Sergey,
>>>
>>>>Jim,
>>>>
>>>>You still missing the point. They fixed bugs in SQL Engine, nothing more. The ANSI compability was a result or the way of bug fixes not an addition to the bug fixes. As Gene mentioned in Re: GROUP BY 1 no longer works Message #754560, the discussion was about what make a default, VFP7 or VFP8 SQL Engine behavior.
>>>
>>>So you are saying that the removal of memo allowability in DISTINCT select queries was a requirement to FIX the known bug?
>>>And you are saying that the need to now include ALL SELECTed fields in GROUP BY was a requirement to FIX the known bug?
>>>I don't think that either is the case, personally, but it is clear to me that at least the GROUP BY **can** be attributable to ANSI SQL compatability. I believe the both could have been fixed within the existing syntax - it's a simple matter of programming.
>>>
>>>I agree that there were bugs and that they have fixed them. I don't feel that it was necessary to adopt ANSI IN ORDER TO FIX THEM.
>>>Now I don't object that ANSI compatibility was implemented TOO, because I think that is a good thing for the future.
>>>BUT it remains that I do not feel that the implementation we got was the optimal one. And it remains that we get what we get and have to live with it.
>>>SNIP