Hi Tom,

>> either to clean up/fix the converter

Seems that only a bit of work was needed here.
At the moment I can convert our 100+ screens
without errors and having fixed those properties
which were converted to default settings but still
marked as "overwritten".

I was able to fix the screen behaviour of @Say (variable)
opaque from 2.6 as well, while also giving speical control
names to these controls. The generated Show-Code also
reflects those new names - seemed to be more secure to handle
it directly in the converter and works.

If you have an especially "difficult" screen (or a testscreen),
I'ld like to test my "new" converter on it...

...
>> The other option I am thinking about is to fix these issues directly
>> massaging the scx via program. The second way might help further on.

>yes, i have taken option 2. well, not working on the scx directly, but i >have written a small toolkit of builders that replace the converted >controls with my specific classes, fix up colours, back styles and so on. i >can give you a snippet of this code if you would like.

Thx, I already have a small prg, which takes a commandgroup with
only 1 command button, replaces the command group with the
command button and sets all the necessary properties while replacing
baseclass and so on.
This will sometimes cause old style commands (show get prompt)
to fail, but works beautifully when walking the object structure.

A generic replace with non-default classes should be fairly simple -
but I might take you up on your offer.

But it has been decided here, (because of budgetary reasons)
to implement only the barest conversion in this year.

So I will implement a strategy to identify the object in the
VFP-object-structure via the old varread/objname functionality
while replacing all the old calls via show get to property settings,
and not implement any "new" screen not built via FPW first.
Works, is better than nothing but still a PITA.

>> That will be my next testing step: if the screen is cleaned up, copy all the controls to a new class-based form and watch for surprises <g>.

...
>>the catch is that this new style form is triggering the "record is read->>only" issue... i will be interested to hear how you get along.

that will be waiting for me next year - now to add some
"business logic" again.


regards

thomas