>Hi George
>
>>>>In short, programming to save a few milliseconds here and there is a very bad practice.
>>>
>>>Programming to make the code less prone to crashing is not a bad idea. Code could easily crash if - as you once demonstrated yourself while trying to debunk the whole mdot thing IIRC - field names and variables conflict.
>>
>>Mike,
>>
>>I haven't ever experienced a crash because of the mdot issue.
>
>Actually, it wasn't a crash it was more that you made a simple mistake and your code sample ended up getting tripped up because you did not use mdot. Point being if it can happen to even you, mdot should be used. I can't search for it, but it was between you and me and we were discussing mdots and performance I think.

Mike,

And I'll freely admit that even this past week, I made a similar mistake. I don't think however that because someone does or doesn't use this convention is a big deal. If you test properly, which is part of the job, then these sort of problems don't occur in production.

My biggest gripe is the use of the word "indefensible". Convertions have one purpose, and one only: Make the code readable. Frankly, I don't care about anything beyond that.
>>
>>What we're talking about here are tools that are provided, free of charge, with VFP. Frankly, I don't see what the problem is. If you don't like the way the code is written, then, in most cases, you have the source, so change it. I have.
>
>I understand that.