Centralised MsgBox
in [Visual Basic]
|
Prev: crack for VSFlex8 in VB6.0
Next: Component Handles
From: Kevin Provance on 7 Oct 2009 18:16 "Scott M." <s-mar(a)nospam.nospam> wrote in message news:%23o5XKU5RKHA.1792(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... | If that's what you need to feel good about yourself, sure. Now, you can go | back to beating your wife and children. Wow, you really are a colossal piece of $hit, aren't you? Statements like that really speak a lot about your character and who you are as a person...and it's not in a flattering way. If you're brave enough to say things like this from behind the safety of your mom's basement computer, then I assume you could say them face to face. Feel free to let me know when you're in town as I would *love* to put you to that test. I'd tell you to pick on someone you're own size, but I suspect that there are very few people who are that grotesquely obese.
From: Karl E. Peterson on 7 Oct 2009 18:18 Scott M. wrote: > If that's what you need to feel good about yourself, sure. Now, you can go > back to beating your wife and children. LOL!!! (Counting down to the Hitler invocations...) -- ..NET: It's About Trust! http://vfred.mvps.org
From: Alex Clark on 7 Oct 2009 20:20 "Karl E. Peterson" <karl(a)exmvps.org> wrote in message news:%23o03$x3RKHA.3876(a)TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... > 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 Well goodness gracious, they finally killed it off? I had no idea, but thank goodness for that - a wasteful, pointless keyword. It does highlight an inconsistency in MS' approach though, as "Call" is similarly superfluous and should really have been removed. Unfortunately however, GoTo is still supported. I can't think of any reason why any programmer (with skills beyond an 11yr old) would need to use GoSub or GoTo, but I'm sure there are some on here who will doubtless be professing their undying love for both.
From: Bill McCarthy on 7 Oct 2009 20:18 Hi Tom, "Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton(a)comcastXXXXXXX.net> wrote in message news:e1Z7oNwRKHA.352(a)TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... > > Oh, I don't know... Yes - it's superflous, but, there's nothing wrong > with > it. I certainly don't use it anymore - but, that's probably because I > switched to C# shortly after I started using .NET :) > If it is superfluous, which it is, it does more harm to use it and gives no benefit. Consider the cases where you have Foo(bar) and Call Foo(bar) To novices it would be reasonable for them to ask what is the difference between these two method calls. The Call keyword does nothing, is completely superfluous. Really, the compiler should emit a warning about it being obsolete, and even offer to strip them from the code for you. If it did something different then that would be a different case, but it doesn't. FWIW, in VB6, I only used Call with Functions, so you could write something like rtn = Foo(bar, baz, a,b,c) or Call Foo(bar, baz, a,b,c) This way you can easily decide if you want the return value or not without messing with the parenthesis. As said before, you no longer have to worry about that in VB .NET, so I would say the Call keyword is a clear candidate for being made Obsolete.
From: Karl E. Peterson on 7 Oct 2009 20:41
Alex Clark wrote: > "Karl E. Peterson" <karl(a)exmvps.org> wrote ... Yo Dilrod, I'll thank you to at least get your attributions straight. > beyond an 11yr old) Even a 5th grader would know who they were quoting. -- ..NET: It's About Trust! http://vfred.mvps.org |