FoxPro Help and Support - VFP 3.0 to 9.0

Author

VFP 3.0 to 9.0

Kyle Miller

2005-10-27, 8:34 am

I recently took over as the computer person for a very small utility company
(Less than 12 employees) and have been slowly trying to update and upgrade
our systems. One area I am running into a brick wall is with our old time
card program which was designed in VFP 3.0. Up until I increased the memory
of our newest system (2001 Gateway Computer) from the factory installed 128MB
to 512MB, the program was running fine. After some testing I found that the
coding for VFP 3.0 does not allow it to recognize my increased memory as when
it is returned to 128MB it runs fine. We have decided not to return to 128MB
so now I need to find out if my 3.0 stuff would possibly work with some
tweaking in 9.0 so that I can present it as a solution to our VP of Ops.
--
Kyle Miller
Norgasco, Inc.
Prudhoe Bay, AK

Jay B

2005-10-27, 8:34 am

there are memory settings that could go in the config.fpw file.
i remember from a long time ago that memory benchmarks were done and it
was determined that the more memory you had, sometimes foxpro didnt
perform right. so you have to tweak foxpro not to use more than 128mb or
so thru the config settings. i dont remember any more details.

but i see no reason why you shouldnt get version 8 or 9 and make it work
there. you should retool the program it a bit and make it better.
version 8 or 9 is much much better than 3.

Kyle Miller wrote:

> I recently took over as the computer person for a very small utility company
> (Less than 12 employees) and have been slowly trying to update and upgrade
> our systems. One area I am running into a brick wall is with our old time
> card program which was designed in VFP 3.0. Up until I increased the memory
> of our newest system (2001 Gateway Computer) from the factory installed 128MB
> to 512MB, the program was running fine. After some testing I found that the
> coding for VFP 3.0 does not allow it to recognize my increased memory as when
> it is returned to 128MB it runs fine. We have decided not to return to 128MB
> so now I need to find out if my 3.0 stuff would possibly work with some
> tweaking in 9.0 so that I can present it as a solution to our VP of Ops.

Cindy Winegarden

2005-10-27, 8:34 am

Hi Kyle,

I've never done an upgrade from VFP3 to 9, but yes, since Fox is very
backward compatible, with some tweaking it will run.

--
Cindy Winegarden MCSD, Microsoft Visual FoxPro MVP
cindy_winegarden@msn
.com www.cindywinegarden.com
Blog: http://spaces.msn.com/members/cindywinegarden

"Kyle Miller" < KyleMiller@discussio
ns.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:AA07CDAF-6CF1-4DE4-B3A2- EA7D9BB51CAE@microso
ft.com...
> ....I need to find out if my 3.0 stuff would possibly work with some
> tweaking in 9.0 ....

Lee Mitchell

2005-10-27, 8:34 am

Hi Kyle:

For the most part, moving to VFP 9.0 from VFP 3.0 should not present much
of a problem. This is especially true if the code was originally written
in VFP 3.0 using OOP techniques.

You can purchase VFP 9.0 from this link:

http://www.microsoft.com/PRODUCTS/i...cid=54787e64-52
69-4500-8bf2-3f06689f4ab3&type=ovr

Since VFP 3.0 is such an old product, you need to purchase the full version
and not the upgrade.

I hope this helps.

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

Sincerely,
Microsoft FoxPro Technical Support
Lee Mitchell

*-- VFP9 HAS ARRIVED!! --*
Read about all the new features of VFP9 here:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/vfoxpro/

*--Purchase VFP 9.0 here:
http://www.microsoft.com/PRODUCTS/i...cid=54787e64-52
69-4500-8bf2-3f06689f4ab3&type=ovr

Keep an eye on the product lifecycle for Visual FoxPro here:
http://support.microsoft.com/gp/lifeselectindex
- VFP5 Mainstream Support retired June 30th, 2003
- VFP6 Mainstream Support retired Sept. 30th, 2003

>there are memory settings that could go in the config.fpw file.
>i remember from a long time ago that memory benchmarks were done and it
>was determined that the more memory you had, sometimes foxpro didnt
>perform right. so you have to tweak foxpro not to use more than 128mb or
>so thru the config settings. i dont remember any more details.

>but i see no reason why you shouldnt get version 8 or 9 and make it work
>there. you should retool the program it a bit and make it better.
>version 8 or 9 is much much better than 3.

>Kyle Miller wrote:

> I recently took over as the computer person for a very small utility
company
> (Less than 12 employees) and have been slowly trying to update and
upgrade
> our systems. One area I am running into a brick wall is with our old time
> card program which was designed in VFP 3.0. Up until I increased the
memory
> of our newest system (2001 Gateway Computer) from the factory installed
128MB

> to 512MB, the program was running fine. After some testing I found that
the
> coding for VFP 3.0 does not allow it to recognize my increased memory as
when
> it is returned to 128MB it runs fine. We have decided not to return to
128MB

> so now I need to find out if my 3.0 stuff would possibly work with some
> tweaking in 9.0 so that I can present it as a solution to our VP of Ops.

Dan Freeman

2005-10-27, 8:34 am

VFP3 was written when darned few machines had as much as 128MB of RAM. It
wasn't written to even work in 512.

As the others have said, moving 3.0->9.0 *should* be straight-forward *if*
the code was written for VFP as opposed to being an upgrade from earlier
versions of FP. The latter might get a little hinky.

Dan

Kyle Miller wrote:
> I recently took over as the computer person for a very small utility
> company (Less than 12 employees) and have been slowly trying to
> update and upgrade our systems. One area I am running into a brick
> wall is with our old time card program which was designed in VFP 3.0.
> Up until I increased the memory of our newest system (2001 Gateway
> Computer) from the factory installed 128MB to 512MB, the program was
> running fine. After some testing I found that the coding for VFP 3.0
> does not allow it to recognize my increased memory as when it is
> returned to 128MB it runs fine. We have decided not to return to
> 128MB so now I need to find out if my 3.0 stuff would possibly work
> with some tweaking in 9.0 so that I can present it as a solution to
> our VP of Ops.

Jack Jackson

2005-10-27, 8:34 am

On Wed, 12 Oct 2005 09:46:03 -0700, "Kyle Miller"
< KyleMiller@discussio
ns.microsoft.com> wrote:

>I recently took over as the computer person for a very small utility company
>(Less than 12 employees) and have been slowly trying to update and upgrade
>our systems. One area I am running into a brick wall is with our old time
>card program which was designed in VFP 3.0. Up until I increased the memory
>of our newest system (2001 Gateway Computer) from the factory installed 128MB
>to 512MB, the program was running fine. After some testing I found that the
>coding for VFP 3.0 does not allow it to recognize my increased memory as when
>it is returned to 128MB it runs fine. We have decided not to return to 128MB
>so now I need to find out if my 3.0 stuff would possibly work with some
>tweaking in 9.0 so that I can present it as a solution to our VP of Ops.

I did an upgrade from VFP3 to VFP7.

The main problems were increased syntax checking (things that were
wrong in VFP3 but were ignored), strict date checks (can be turned
off, but fixing is better) and new reserved works that conflicted with
variable names.

All in all it wasn't too difficult.

Sponsored Links