Hi Sergey,

I agree with Fabio, that this behavior is more expectant and would be better to have. However, since the other behavior is documented, it could not be called a bug, you're right. I'm thinking, what would be the best thread title here?

I also noticed, that Fabio uses word "bug" too often...

>Hi Fabio,
>
>
>>Hi Sergey,
>>>You know Fabio, it gets annoying that you call a bug anything you don't like
>>
>>This is a your opinion.
>
>Other people pointed that out also.
>
>>
>>> or don't understand.
>>
>>This is false, and this is generic way to liquidate the problems.
>
>Don't kid yourself.
>
>
>>On specific:
>>
>>On SQL Server the ALTER TABLE for IDENTITY field it works like I waited for to me.
>>
>>OK, VFP it is not comparable with SQL Server,
>>but if one implements one new functionality, it would have at least to complete it at least in the basic functions.
>
>You just confirmed what I said above. The behavior is documented. The fact that you, as many other people, don't like it doesn't make it a bug.