>>>David,
>>>
>>*--
>>>>And you and your boss do realize that COPY/PASTE programming is very, VERY, VERY bad. You should be subclassing instead.
>>*--
>>>
>>>>I am very, VERY, VERY aware of the implications of copy/paste programming. I FULLY subsrible to the school of 'do it once, and do it properly' and when you need and object that does a simlar job, SUBCLASS:)
>>
>>IMHO, I think that the fact that all of the definitions are in one big file is reason enough not to follow this approach, as it means you have all or nothing. I can 'cherry pick' the libraries that I want to include in any particular project. I also like the to see the visual representation of the custom object on my container, it feels more tangible than just including a procedure file, and you can tell at a glance that your form or container includes the 'order' object etc.
>
>Steve,
>
>I believe that this is purely a matter of design and really has nothing whatsoever to do with which is inherently better. Afterall, there's nothing to stop anyone from creating a bloated visual non-visual custom class.
>
>I don't believe that it's a matter of cohesion, applied at the class level.

Hey, I like that; "bloated visual non-visual custom class". Has a nice ring to it.

Steve