OK alright. My first impression on Alan's remark was a negative, meaning negative in the sense of the product, like this product is a hack, it is no good to use. Now meanwhile I have looked around and found on Wiki an explication of 'hack' :* Hacking is finding applications that are not intended by the creator of the resource, especially with regard to computers. Complexity does not play a role here, on the contrary, easy and fast alternative solutions are preferred. The use of a clothes peg to prevent a trouser leg from coming between a bicycle chain is basically a hack. "Normal" inventions and improvements are therefore not hacks, as long as they are used for what they are made for.* This makes me think Alan is not correct and I conclude VFPA is an improvement. Besides, the history of Alan's use: since 1991, I am proud to tell you I was there before 1990, started with dBaseII jumped from dBaseIV to FoxPro for DOS into now VFP9SP2. Regards, Koen
Op di 26 nov. 2019 om 16:32 schreef MB Software Solutions, LLC < mbsoftwaresolutions@mbsoftwaresolutions.com>:
On 11/26/2019 4:26 AM, Alan Bourke wrote:
On Mon, 25 Nov 2019, at 5:39 PM, Koen Piller wrote:
*my motto of the day: *Those who insist that VFPA is a hacked version of VFP9 have no knowledge of Visual FoxPro.
I've been working with FoxPro since 1991, so spare me your motto. This
thing alters the binaries, and is therefore a hack in the classic sense of the term. Having said that I'm sure it's all fine and legit, if anyone wants to take a gamble on it.
Yeah, Koen...Alan's been here a long time and is well respected. Any alteration as he says is truly a "hack" but the mere words are not meant to convey anything nefarious or illegal (although I restate my surprise at M$ not objecting...but as we said, it's not the ballmer era anymore).
[excessive quoting removed by server]