Will,

>I agree. As I stated earlier, a "larger-than-preferred" dropdown was how I found out about the bug... The class was designed and has performed excellent in applications with much smaller recordsets for 4 years - 50 to 6500 records. The bug is regarding the element limit of the array. So lets see... 6550 records x 5 columns is 32,750 elements. Going from a 13,000 record limit to a 6550 record limit is a big concern.

I did not dispute that this is a bug. Array properties should behave exactly like array memvars.

Frankly since arrays are limited to 65k items, I've never really used them to hold large number of items because there was always a risk of hitting that limit, I'll use a cursor instead. I like to stay at least one order of magnitude away from a system limitation to make sure that my code has a higher probability of working through the system lifetime. I can blame that on my engineering background that basically says makes something at least twice as strong as it needs to be.

I merely tried to point out that it is a bug that should not affect the acceptable use of a cbo. A cbo should not have more than a couple of tens of items in it. A lst should not have more than a couple of hundreds of items.

Your listed example showed a 2 column array not a 5 column array. Without the bug in VFP8 or the correctly working VFP7, two columns would fail on the 32,501st employee. That number is not far enough away from 22,701 to be comfortable for me. I'd stay an order of magnitude away to 3,250 employees, but then again I wouldn't be using a cbo or lst control either for this UI component.

>Ok... Finally some constructive input. I've spent many long nights perfecting this combobox class. It's a "Quick-Books" classic and works great. I do agree, with VFP controls anything can be built. My Outlook bar is all VFP controls. For building data-intense interfaces you couldn't ask for better than VFP controls.

I hope that most of what I post is considered constructive criticism/input/ideas I don't jump in to slam something just for the sake of stirring up trouble.

Personally I still use Quicken4, yes folks the old DOS version, it's one of the cleanest UIs I have ever used. One of the first VFP3 classes I developed was a Quicken style date control.

I also believe that just because you can do something, it doesn't mean that you should do it. Just because you can put several thousand items in a cbo doesn't mean that you should. Just because you can write a 10 table join select statement doesn't mean that you should.

>That's why I am bummed about this bug in VFP 8.0. Probably I wouldn't hit the limit with anything in production right now... but how long? And how long before a fix?

Staying an order of magnitude away from the limit should keep you safe. I can't say if or when this bug will be fixed in VFP8. I'm pretty sure it won't exist in VFP9.