On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 3:32 AM, Alan Bourke <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Thu, 04 Jun 2009 15:31 -0500, "Stephen Russell" > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Why would M$ avoid VFP porting to the CLR is probably a better Q. > > Well, we have the Dynamic Language Runtime now as well of course. A far > better fit for re-engineering something that has VFP syntax. > --
I thought it was a simple as the base data storage being the biggest hurdle. The dbf is unsecure. Very bad in today's mindset. The dbf has a file size limit. Just a start here. There are plenty of others. -- Stephen Russell Sr. Production Systems Programmer Web and Windows Development Independent Contractor Memphis TN 901.246-0159 _______________________________________________ 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.
