>
OK, silly me, I'm here and in all of the enhancement meetings and somehow missed this one. COM debugging has never been seriously discussed AFAIK in my time here.
>

Silly me, how on Earth could I think COM Debugging is/was important... It was/has been suggested numerous times. The proferred reason why it was not added - too expensive....


>I wasn't here 4-5 years ago and can't address this knowledgeably.

Sure you can - just ask somebody who was there 4-5 years ago.


>
I disagree. We are here, primarily, to promote VFP and our VFP developer base.
>

I don't disagree that is why you are there - but clearly, that qets quashed when the overall MS corporate goals come into play.

>
Sure, if you're working on a project that VFP is not the best choice for, we'd like you to choose another MS tool, such as .Net. But, again, not once have I been in a discussion where something was not considered because it'd make VFP too attractive. That's just plain silly.
>

Your participation in a discussion is not a barometer of veracity in this case.

>
No, John, you should be more circumspect before trying to sow FUD into a situation you have no first-hand knowledge of. Why do I have to be careful posting the honest truth?
>

As opposed to the other kind of truth??? I have more knowledge than you think on this topic John.

>
Frankly, I don't care what you smell from 4,000 miles away.
>

I am only 2500 miles away - but that is neither here nor there...

>
I can't figure what you're saying nor why you're saying it
>

But yet you comment on it to a large degree and make conclusions.

>
but I can't credit it for being "in the know" nor logical.
>

Looking at the latter first, if you don't know what it is - how can you make a conclusion as far as logic is concerned? As to the former - I brought up COM debugging as an example that I have intimate knowledge of - in addition to events that could be defined/consumed. Your stated premise was that nothing got cut for budgetary reasons. You are 100% wrong on that matter - whether directly or indirectly. You made that assertion and I challenged that assertion with a couple of examples.

>
You serve no one but your own apparently misguided ego when you post stuff like this.
>

Well - when somebody from MS comes up here and makes a false statement such as you did - I serve a purpose by calling that out. You misdirecting it back to me - making it about my ego is pure nonsense and is at best - an ad hom. attack that is not germane to the point.

Bottom line, stuff has been cut for budgetary related reasons - your disagreement with that nothwithstanding. And yes - given your permission - you should be careful about making those kind of mis-statements. It was friendly advice more than anything. Seems to me in the past I gave you that same advice - which at times you did not heed. Your call.

< JVP >