Hi Fabio,
> does not have any importance, it is a VFP rule.
Here I agree, my "golden rule" is:
always use m. when something is read (including use as parameter)
especially use m. for reference parameters
especially use m. in table based operations (for, where)

>programs and articles suffers from laziness and approximation, and the brace laziness and approximation they diffuse more quickly than a virus.

and yes, sometimes unwanted lazyness creeps into my code as well<g>.
But what of m.this and m.thisform ?
vfp code behaviour "suggests" that these should mdotted as well,
on the other hand both are vfp keywords and
as such shouldn't be used as field names in the first place<g>.

Here I am consciously "lazy" as it enhances readability [for me].
The benefit is for me worth the risk. So viewed from "code correctness" you are correct,
but from best use of budget it might be more cost effective to use other approaches.

regards

thomas