Hi Tore,

>In general I also appreciate your messages, to have that clear.

Thanks,

>What caused my reaction was your comments about m.this and m.thisform. As I wrote in my last message, the use of m.this and m.thisform is not documented, and I had NEVER seen it before Fabio's message. In VFP terminology this and thisform are not variables, but reserved words with specific meanings. Treating them as variables may work, but doing is at your own risk. Calling the 'side effects' a bug, is stretching it way too far in my eyes. How VFP handles these reserved words and different variables internally is irrelevant.

I think I have to disagree somewhat, though I recognize that using the m. usage is strage up here. I'm a firm believer that VFP should never should raise a C5. Of course we can identify a few cases where the C5 was raised through external code and out of VFPs control (in process (COM) servers and DLLs), but the internal VFP code should be clean of that.

I think this is the message the VFPT has been given by the VFP community for the last couple a versions, so I don't see I'm way off in saying this.

Walter,