>I've been told that w***() functions (wontop(), wparent(), etc) are not OOP, but I don't understand why.
>
>It seems to me that the arguments that I've heard could be applied to just about any function that existed before OOP.
>ie: "srows()" existed before OOP, so does that make it non-OOP?
>How is that different than "wparent()"?
>
>What am I missing?
>
>TIA

Bill;

OOP can be viewed in a number of ways and if you have read and studied the literature such as presented by Grady Booch, you may wonder how much theory can or should become practice.

Some people state OOP has no value. Others insist that inheritance has no value. Still another group makes good use of many of the features of OOP. Who is correct? Perhaps everyone is correct as long as you can get the job done.

OOP can be very academic, of great value or if misunderstood a serious problem. How you wish to approach a solution is up to you.

One person I met some years ago said he liked to use the 80 – 20 rule as applied to OOP. That is 80% OOP and 20% procedural code. I find to be too much of one mindset or another labels you in some way.
With OOP like any other subject you have buzzwords. Encapsulation, objects and messaging come to mind. You can be a purest or a rebel – the choice is yours.

Personally, I like OOP and use many of its features. Along with a good commercial framework OOP saves many hours of time in the development, additions and maintenance of applications.

To attempt to answer your question I might suggest that a command or function call is not OOP. To try to get into the theory, practice and reality would take a rather long post.

In this specific case I believe you are relating to technology used previous to Visual FoxPro, which is “Windows Based”, as opposed to “Form Based”. “Windows Based” does not use a Read Event as does “Form Based”. Just thinking of the read limit of 5 for “Windows Based” programming.

Tom