Centralised MsgBox
in [Visual Basic]
|
Prev: crack for VSFlex8 in VB6.0
Next: Component Handles
From: Scott M. on 14 Oct 2009 20:24 "Karl E. Peterson" <karl(a)exmvps.org> wrote in message news:eGOByjSTKHA.5164(a)TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... > Property Setters is just retarded. > > I just looked at the first few pages of returns from this... > > http://www.google.com/search?q=%22property+setters%22+vb > > ... and not a single link referred to ClassicVB. Uh, maybe because most people out there use the term VB to mean VB .NET these days? Drop a "6" in there and you'll see better results. Or, even better yet, learn how to do a proper Google search to find what you're looking for: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=property+let+vb6&aq=f&oq=&aqi=g-m1 Either way, you're now changing your initial incorrect statement that "Let" isn't used in VB 6, to using it is "retarded"? Really, what an insighful rebuttal with irrelevant information. Way to change the topic and make no point whatsoever, Karl! > You're clearly confused, and just babbling about other languages. So, now you're back to saying that "Let" isn't used in VB 6? If you are saying that it isn't used, then that proves without a shadow of a doubt that you really don't know VB 6 the way others believe you do. If you are saying that it is, then you are just changing to topic and I can't for the life of me understand why you think I'm talking about some other language. Either way, you clearly have shown that you don't know what you are talking about. I made a simple point about "Let", you finatically said I was wrong, I "jogged" your memory and you reversed your position, and now you are changing the subject to how useful the word is and perhaps even going back to the incorrect position about the need to use the word in the language. >> You use Property Set only when the property will hold an object >> reference. > > Duh. Well, gee Karl, when you said that you don't use Property Let to make setters, you use Property Set, you were wrong and what is a "duh" for you now, seemed to not be such a "duh" for you when you made the incorrect statement. > >> That pretty much sums up how you've interacted with me Karl. > > http://twitter.com/shitmydadsays/status/3869125922 > -- > .NET: It's About Trust! > http://vfred.mvps.org >
From: Karl E. Peterson on 14 Oct 2009 20:24 Scott M. wrote: > "Karl E. Peterson" <karl(a)exmvps.org> wrote in message > news:Oty9ZkSTKHA.4592(a)TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... >> Scott M. wrote: >>> You'll just need to grow up. >> >> Says the guy who's scared to use his real name. > > Are you kidding me? I think it's the wisest thing ever to not let crazy > people find out how to find you. Why's that? Because you run around trying your best to irritate everyone? Figures you got a lot of people trying to hunt you down. > But, I think it's awesome that for someone who's supposed to be so respected > and has got these really important letters after their name, Ummm, what letters? > Karl, you're not the guru you think you are. Cite? > I have no more time to waste on ignorant blowhards such as yourself. Now we all get the chance to confirm the liar part. > In the end, I don't really care about you either. Whoops! That didn't take long, did it? Bet you can't keep yourself from keeping it up. Afterall, if you could, you'd man-up and use your real name. <LOL> -- ..NET: It's About Trust! http://vfred.mvps.org
From: Karl E. Peterson on 14 Oct 2009 20:30 Scott M. wrote: > "Karl E. Peterson" <karl(a)exmvps.org> wrote in message > news:eGOByjSTKHA.5164(a)TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... > >> Property Setters is just retarded. >> >> I just looked at the first few pages of returns from this... >> >> http://www.google.com/search?q=%22property+setters%22+vb >> >> ... and not a single link referred to ClassicVB. > > Uh, maybe because most people out there use the term VB to mean VB .NET > these days? Drop a "6" in there and you'll see better results. Or, even > better yet, learn how to do a proper Google search to find what you're > looking for: > > http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=property+let+vb6&aq=f&oq=&aqi=g-m1 Bzzzzt. Not the same phrase you used, not in quotes, not even VB6 on most of the results. Try again? > Either way, you're now changing your initial incorrect statement that "Let" > isn't used in VB 6, to using it is "retarded"? What's retarded is you using a VFred phrase to describe coding methods in VB6. Would you rather I just say *you* are retarded? Seems like I've put that previous sentence about six different ways so far, and you've yet to parse it. Man-up, trollboy. If you can't stand behind your own words, you're worthless. -- ..NET: It's About Trust! http://vfred.mvps.org
From: Scott M. on 14 Oct 2009 20:57 "Karl E. Peterson" <karl(a)exmvps.org> wrote in message news:%23g$pE7STKHA.4144(a)TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=property+let+vb6&aq=f&oq=&aqi=g-m1 > > Bzzzzt. Not the same phrase you used, not in quotes, not even VB6 on most > of the results. Try again? Um, how high are you? The entire first page of results are ALL about VB 6 or VB 6 as compared to VB .NET (interesting that other people would dare to compare the two languages). As for what phrase I used, I never said anthing about Googling my phase, I said you use "Let" when you make a property setter in VB 6. If you aren't intelligent enough to find Google results for "Let", then that really isn't my problem. But, again, what does your inablility to find what you are looking for on Google have to do with the FACT that "Let" is a part of the VB 6 langauage? >> Either way, you're now changing your initial incorrect statement that >> "Let" >> isn't used in VB 6, to using it is "retarded"? > > What's retarded is you using a VFred phrase to describe coding methods in > VB6. "Let" is not part of VB .NET, nor did I ever say it was. So you are now going back to your (already proven) incorrect understanding of VB 6 and also adding that you don't know VB .NET either. > Would you rather I just say *you* are retarded? Seems like I've put that > previous sentence about six different ways so far, and you've yet to parse > it. Because (unlike you), I am interested in presenting *facts* that relate to the topic. For a guy that can't stand the mere mention of .NET in you hallowed VB 6 group because you feel it's off-topic, you have no problem taking the thread off-topic the minute you're wrong about someting. FACT > > Man-up, trollboy. If you can't stand behind your own words, you're > worthless. Good thing I've backed up what I've said then. How about you try to do it without getting off-topic and throwing insults. I'm betting you can't. > -- > .NET: It's About Trust! > http://vfred.mvps.org >
From: Karl E. Peterson on 14 Oct 2009 21:13
Scott M. wrote: > "Karl E. Peterson" <karl(a)exmvps.org> wrote in message > news:%23g$pE7STKHA.4144(a)TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >>> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=property+let+vb6&aq=f&oq=&aqi=g-m1 >> >> Bzzzzt. Not the same phrase you used, not in quotes, not even VB6 on most >> of the results. Try again? > > Um, how high are you? How high are you? You used the phrase "property setters" in this thread, but not in your google. That alone renders the rest of your dribble meaningless. No one, not even I, have disputed that "Property Let" is extremely common in VB6. Get a f'n clue. > As for what phrase I used, I never said anthing about Googling my phase, I don't blame you. Because it'd show that it wasn't relevant to the language you're attempting to discuss. > Because (unlike you), I am interested in presenting *facts* that relate to > the topic. LOL! > For a guy that can't stand the mere mention of .NET in you > hallowed VB 6 group because you feel it's off-topic, Have to resort to making sh�t up, now, do you? > Good thing I've backed up what I've said then. Well, let's see, you said you weren't going to reply to me anymore, didn't you? And yet here you are, unable to stop yourself. Man-up, trollboy. -- ..NET: It's About Trust! http://vfred.mvps.org |