>You are sumamrizing the situation incorrectly.

OK...we'll see if you support this premise...

>
I said that we have a prototype of a utility that is a COM wrapper around base .NET Framework classes allowing you to call some of them directly from within VFP. The utility is not complete, and we have to evaluate if it is worth our effort to continue it, test it, and release it. We also have to evaluate if it is acutally better to simply use .NET programming to call classes rather than call them from within VFP and have various limitations (which there will be). I am asking for feedback since we have not yet decided on what we plan to do with this utility, if anything. I never said we "plan" to release it, so your conclusion that it is a done deal is incorrect. I respect your opinions, but sometimes your assumptions are incorrect which makes your opinions less useful.
>

First off, I never said or claimed it was a done deal on your part. Rather, I commented that the idea was rather absurd for a number of reasons. You yourself made a post that pretty much, made it almost a foregone conclusion that it would not happen.

In a nutshell, it went like this:

1. You made a post about a "utility" - seeking suggestions from people on which classes they would like to access "natively" from VFP. In that request, you asked people to give a detailed use case - justifying their wish.

2. You received a number of responses, ranging from "I want them all" to others that approximated what you asked for.

3. Subsequently, you made a post that basically stated all the reasons why it would be highly unlikely this "utility" would be feasible, be of value, see the light of day. This later post of yours clarified that you were looking to get "convinced" that this idea would have merit.

Ken...can you really say with a straight face that there was an issue with respect to whether to use the native .NET framework or whether to use an interface in Fox? You cannot be serious - can you??? That is an absurd argument Ken. Of course it would be better to work with .NET classes in their native environment.

FWIW Ken, you totally bypassed the issue on why features Fox developers could really use - like native COM Debugging, better integration with SQL Server - never made it into the product. I know the reasons why - but perhaps you should state why those things never did nor will ever make it into the product and that instead, some marginally useful utility like this would get even the slightest consideration...

You know Ken, you saying that I have not summarized correctly does not make it so. You labeling my assumptions incorrect does not make them incorrect.


Cmon Ken...how could people ever give you meaningful feedback on a matter like this. The fact is, you know much more than the average person here. If anybody could say which classes could be useful - it would be you. Nobody here has seen this utility - so you could never get meaningful feedback on that idea.

I understand the logic in asking a question that you already know the answer to. When making and trying to prove a point - it is a good technique. On one level, I guess it gives a good appearance because it shows that an effort is being made in certain areas. But...when those efforts don't have much merit, IMO - it is an illusory offer at best. And you labeling my comments as mis-characterizations - without saying why they are mischaracterizations does not invalidate my point.