Hi Herman,

It REALLY is all about personal opinion...
>Hi Walter,
>
>I never try to involve in a debate with anyone about anything. But I see that we are in the same POV in this M. things. It does ugly :-)

I don't mind "m." nearly as much as I absolutely HATE lcMyVariable or llRet. These are REAL ugliness!
>
>I just want to say one thing. If I REALY DO NEED SPEED DESPERATELY, I will go to C/C++ or even Assembly (of course with hands optimization) for that matter.

So C/C++ is prettier than VFP???? < s >
By the way... with processors doing 2ghz - 3+ghz, these kinds of issues are VERY trivial compared to the cost (in time) of actual I/O. There is where people need to concentrate their performance efforts, in my humble opinion.

Jim
>
>>
>>Number 1, my favourate lets me keep writing code without the ugly use of m. and only in rare occasions where I cannot be sure of having a field name in a selected table, I´ll use the m. argument. As for the speed argument, it really only is applicable in long CPU intensive jobs where a large field count table is selected. I´d have difficulty in naming one case I´ve ever programmed in my carreer.
>>
>>Bottom line, you can write good and solid code with or without using m. . No matter the argument you´re not going to convince the well experienced VFP developper to change his standpoint on this. It is non productive.
>>
>>My 0.02 eurocents
>
>Regards