>If you suggest reading another book, why did you write your article in the first place ???
>

Because you'll gain great insite into many things that aren't covered in my standards document and why some things are listed in my document. Code Complete is a teriffic language neutral book about coding standards and how to code better. I put my standards on my web site as a place for people to start when developing their own specific VFP standards.

>
>This is a very poor defense if you'd ask me. Even now your explaination is silly. If you refer to a book than at least tell us what coding rule is found in the book, on what page or chapter, and a brief explaination about the reasoning of the author.

That's not the job of a coding standard. Standards should be easy to read and digest so that you can get to the job at hand. They shouldn't be cluttered with additional information that does not pertain to doing the coding in a clear, easily maintaned manner.

>
>I won't buy a book, wait for three weeks to arrive and come to the same conclusion as I did with your article (because I know there are a lot of BAD authors when it comes to this subject). I'm using my own coding standard and perfectly happy with it. I've got better things to do in finding out what you're trying to explain.

Again...Your opinion...and again you failed to read the second paragraph of my article and the line that I've now posted twice in this thread. As for Code Complete, it got 4 1/2 stars in 128 reviews on Amazon.com, so I'm definately not alone in my opinion on it.