Centralised MsgBox
in [Visual Basic]
|
Prev: crack for VSFlex8 in VB6.0
Next: Component Handles
From: Karl E. Peterson on 7 Oct 2009 14:32 Mike Williams wrote: > "Alex Clark" <quanta(a)noemail.noemail> wrote ... >> , still supports >> an ancient keword like "Call". And, unfortunately, GoTo >> as well. And, in fact, every other core BASIC keyword. > > No it doesn't. Gosub, for example, is not supported in VB.Net. Stop > repeatedly making untrue and ill thought out statements, troll. And let's not forget keyword redefinitions, the very definition of EVIL. For example, there was absolutely no reason to abuse Return as they did, when an optional [retval] parameter could have just as easily been added to Exit Function. Yeah, yeah, then the purists would've had to explicitly admit multiple exit points, I know. Horrors! -- ..NET: It's About Trust! http://vfred.mvps.org
From: Karl E. Peterson on 7 Oct 2009 14:35 mayayana wrote: > What does all this mean? Is it some sort of > .Net syndrome? Mad Net Disease? Or maybe .Net > is like the Mormons: You have to go out and evangelize > for a period of time? Or maybe this phenomenon is > signalling the beginning of the end of .Net. Yeah, it's like the cheeseheads invading *every* NFL board diss'ing the Vikings because they're 4-0 with a purple #4! <snicker> > Even cranky, fervent Linux devotees don't go so far > as to hang around other groups to tell people they're > using the wrong tool or product. Stick a brat in it. It's over! <eg> -- ..NET: It's About Trust! http://vfred.mvps.org
From: Karl E. Peterson on 7 Oct 2009 14:36 Paul Clement once again proves irony knows no bounds: > Hmm... why is it that your best intellectual effort always results in > marginalizing other people? > > Is that the type of behavior *you* would deem rational? ;-) -- ..NET: It's About Trust! http://vfred.mvps.org
From: Eduardo on 7 Oct 2009 14:51 mayayana escribi�: > Or maybe .Net > is like the Mormons: You have to go out and evangelize > for a period of time? LOL!
From: Scott M. on 7 Oct 2009 16:55
Yes, seriously Tom. The first thing any classic VB developer should learn about VB .NET is that it isn't VB 6 and as such, they are going to have to change their coding mentality to get the most from .NET. As someone who has trained literally thousands of people on .NET since its inception (and a good chunk of those being classic VB developers), I can tell you that IMHO not only is the continued use of "Call" not something that is taught, but rather it is something that is actively discouraged (along with all the other legacy VB stuff). -Scott "Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton(a)comcastXXXXXXX.net> wrote in message news:ub88KftRKHA.4504(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > On 2009-10-06, Scott M. <s-mar(a)nospam.nospam> wrote: >> >> "Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton(a)comcastXXXXXXX.net> wrote in message >> news:%23HOPJlgRKHA.1796(a)TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >>> On 2009-10-05, Scott M. <s-mar(a)nospam.nospam> wrote: >>>> It's supported for legacy reasons, but not needed at all. It's not >>>> included >>>> in any code snippets or required as it is in VB 6. In short, there is >>>> no >>>> reason to ever use or need it in .NET. >>>> >>> >>> Where was it rquired in VB6? >>> >>> Besides, required or not is beside the point. It's there, it can be >>> used - so >>> you can't judge it to be vb6 code simple because it uses the the call >>> keyword. >>> >>> -- >>> Tom Shelton >> >> I disagree. I think that in "reality" you can very easily make a very >> accurate educated guess that this code is VB 6 code. > > Are you kidding? Seriously, Scott - many VB.CLASSIC developers (including > myself) used to be in the habbit of using call on almost all calls that > didn't > assign a value - simply because the VB.CLASSIC way of handeling parens was > so > confusing :) Do you think they are just going to give up that habbit > overnight? I know lots of my early VB.NET code has lots of Call > statements in > it :) > > -- > Tom Shelton |