Sorry for any confusion, yes, I know it's a complete alternative.. Perhaps my choice of "extend" was misleading.
I was responding to Mike's question as to why they are working on this project, ie, what does it offer, or what is the point of it. To me, the reason someone would create a complete alternative would be so you can offer enhanced features not found in the original *or* to have available for use in case the original IDE no longer works.. -Steve At 04:36 PM 04/21/2010, you wrote: >Steve, > >The goal of VFP Studio is to be a complete alternative IDE for VFP >developers, not to extend it. What Craig and Bo have demonstrated the >language service, editing PRG and class code in an editor with full VFP >IntelliSense, code colorization, with the additional benefits that the VS >editors bring to the table. As far as I know it will still require a VFP 9 >license to compile the projects to the EXE in the background. > >Here is a short screencast list readers might be interested in: >http://www.sweetpotatosoftware.com/VFPStudio/VFPStudioCodeEditor.htm > >Rick >White Light Computing, Inc. > >www.whitelightcomputing.com >www.swfox.net >www.rickschummer.com > > >-----Original Message----- >From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On >Behalf Of Steve Ellenoff >Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2010 03:41 PM >To: [email protected] >Subject: Re: VFP Studio - vapourware ? > >Obviously I'm not Craig or Bo, so this is just my personal opinion >(for what it's worth), but my impression the project exists is for >these two reasons: > >1) To extend the functionality of the VFP IDE and offer we developers >more functionality than the VFP9 IDE offers.. >Because what we have is already excellent, it's hard to think what >more VFP Studio could offer. Having worked a lot in the VS.NET IDE >though, there are a few features I'd love to see in the VFP9 IDE. In >other words, the more time you spend in a different IDE than VFP, the >easier it is to envision what problems VFP Studio might be attempting >to address. > >Also realize that several fantastic VFPX projects were created to >enhance the VFP IDE experience, so clearly people are finding >limitations of the current VFP IDE and are attempting to address >them. I would see VFP Studio as attempting to do the same exact thing >in a more controlled and integrated solution. > >2) To exist as a VFP IDE alternative in the event that (for whatever >reason) we developers are no longer able to run the original VFP9 >IDE. Given that free Virtual Machine technology exists today, this >point is far less necessary than it once was, although still >plausible for people who may not want to run a VM just to do VFP >development. > >That's my opinion, Craig and Bo may have totally different answers! >-Steve > > > [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.
