@James-Burke-0 ,
Unfortunately, every one of those variants has NON-Standard extensions, so it would be virtually impossible to do a one UDL to rule them all type of thing. The current xBASE, doesn’t work with plain dBASE, although much of it will, but it doesn’t come close to what was needed for dBASE Plus, an OOP version of dBASE, which is why I created that one with a lot of help from the folks around here.
The language syntax differences would drive you mad, and unless you’re willing to create a lexer to handle them all, based on some criteria like file extensions, stock boilerplate code at the start of files, etc…you’ll be working your tail off to track down all the reference material needed plus writing, editing and fixing the variances that can occur between variants.
It took me a year to complete the dBASE Plus UDL that, thanks to @PeterJones , is now in the UDL languages repository as he mentions above. You can try and use that or the xBASE version as a start.
This won’t be a project for the faint of heart, so unless you’re ready to take on that task, I’d stick to only worrying about the variant that you need to work with.