> (hmm... apart from > patching security > holes, has anyone on this list actually obtained successful > results from MS > support?)
Actually, in VFP7 when I would SET STEP ON in a program, which then executed an EXECSCRIPT() command, and I continued to step through the code called via EXECSCRIPT(), upon completion of the called code VFP7 would throw a push/pop error. I called M$ Tech Support, and was later eMailed a note advising they agreed it was a bug, and although not corrected in VFP7 (VFP8 was soon to be launched) it would be corrected in VFP8. Sure enough, VFP8 and VFP9 no longer have that problem. So, I count that as a fix. I would have preferred to have found the bug sooner than I did, and see it get fixed in a VFP7 SP release, as I still code in VFP7, and in my older apps still compile in VFP7. For my newer stuff I code/compile in VFP9. Gil > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Charlie Coleman > Sent: Friday, June 15, 2007 1:29 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [NF] Is anyone else here getting dumber like me? > > > At 06:38 AM 6/12/2007 -0400, Mike yearwood wrote: > >Honestly I feel I'm getting more frustrated with programming in > >general. It seems all other industries have standards that prevent > >chaotic advances in multiple directions simultaneously. Automotive, > >electronics, carpentry, floor tiles, door knobs. > > ... > > Yep. And now MS is telling developers they where they can or cannot write > data to the hard drive? Even if the access rights were set up > accordingly? > It's good that Federal agencies have banned Vista for now. Hopefully > they'll realize what a waste it really is. Or maybe they'll be > prompted to > look to Linux where a company can't strong-arm you into paying > for upgrades > by dropping support for older versions (hmm... apart from > patching security > holes, has anyone on this list actually obtained successful > results from MS > support?) > > You're right, we have no standards enforcement in the computer industry. > Or, perhaps it's only in a fledgling state. You'd think a professional > organization like ACM would have grabbed the bull by the horns by > now. W3C > looks somewhat promising, but until they can get some muscle to actually > penalize MS for not conforming to standards, their benefit (and any > standards body's benefit) is marginal. > > ... > > >Programmers can't even get agreement on designs in even one language! > > Hmmm... Well, to bring this back to the topic of the original thread. The > only sure sign you're getting dumber is if you continue down the MS > "roadmap" (note: I've peaked ahead... the road ends at a brick wall <g>). > > -Charlie > > > [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
