>SNIP
>>
>>Jim's use of 'pandering (my loaded term) to developers with average capability' is a truism, but should not be used without context. I take it for granted that all developers know why you can test for the existence of a variable followed by it's value when connected with an AND i.e.

IF TYPE( "SomeVar" ) == "N" AND SomeVar > 0 THEN

Average? Where is Bill Clinton when you need a definition?
>
>Hi Houston,
>
>I agree that some basic level of knowledge has to be assumed for whoever may read code next. And your example is a good one as would be several other VFP constructs/combinations.
>
>It surely is difficult to draw a line in the sand on this kind of issue, especially when it might preclude one's demonstrating his prowess with the language. And how is a novice to get any better if they are not exposed to some more esoteric stuff in the first place.
>
>Finally, coding for the average programmer's skill does take more time and more lines of code. It just seems to me that the business we're in demands it if we ever want any kind of designation nearing 'professional'.
>
>cheers

Hi Jim, I agree. Whilst we might strive to write well commented and readable code this is not always achievable because of (for example) time constraints or as is often the case for myself, sheer complexity. Even after writing enormous amounts of comment, renaming variables (and function names and field names) several times I still find myself looking at code that I know will hurt my head when I return to it – I guess it helps that in addition to be a chronic optimist I'm also a masochist.