>No, this is not the case. As presented, the COM wrapper would allow you to instantiate a .NET class, but then you'll need to learn how to use this class anyway, and doing so from VFP would be a lot more difficult than doing it from .NET.
>
>To keep with Michael Asherman metaphor, this would be as if they add some way in which you can write C++ code within VFP and make it run. Sure, you won't need VC++ to to this, but you would need to know C++ anyway, and you'd loss most editor, debugger and environment.
>
>In the end, what Ken propossed is not something that would avoid you having to learn .NET at all. That's why he was unsure about the usefulness of this potential kit.
>

Well, it's a little hard to judge it without actually using it. It sounded like it automated creating a COM wrapper to the .NET classes (or, maybe more specifically, it didn't create a "live" COM wrapper, but a way of calling the .NET through COM). Obviously, you'll still need to know how to use the class. But for anyone to be able to give Ken some useful feedback, that would have to be the case anyway. The code Ken posted didn't look like it was all that complicated to me.

I guess what this comes down to is the "hassle" factor. Is it bigger hassle to have to write a COM wrapper for every class I'd like to use, or is it a bigger hassle to use the wrapper? Obviously someone thought it might be useful if they spent the time writing the wrapper in the first place. To me, learning .NET really isn't the biggest part of this - I'm already using it in the places where I think it's appropriate. However, I'm not doing a bunch of COM interop just because of the hassle-factor.

Since it's already written, I'd prefer they release it along with the source to the wild "as-is" . Why waste the development time that was already invested? If it's a non-starter, so be it (if it's not supported it doesn't cost them much, and if it's a non-starter, no one will use it anyway). At the very least, someone might be able to learn something new from the code. It's not like MS has never released source code w/o supporting it <g>.