Logical On

[Cor]

Hi group,

A question to the group, would it not be for a lot of the users better when
there was beside "Option strict on" an "Option logical Strict on".

I was automaticaly writting Textbox1.text = 0.tostring. I know what it has
to be, but I did this automaticly.

I find this crazy, it cannot be something else than a string, so the
compiler must have to find this very easy, but for the puritains, than that
option, than they can set it off.

I think that for a lot of VB users this kind of things is more important
than operator overloading or other more C behaviour (I understand a lot of
sophisticated users want it, so I would not say, don't let them make it, but
I think that this "Option logical strict on" would get 90% of the users
while operator overloading maybe 10%).

Just a thougth?

Cor

[Cor]

Herfried,

Ah... you only want an "improvemen t" of the IDE?

First not but thinking about it, it would give the same result and what you
think about that?

Cor

AH is a Dutch grocer

[Herfried K. Wagner [MVP]]

* "Cor" <no*@non.com> scripsit:

Ah... you only want an "improvemen t" of the IDE?
First not but thinking about it, it would give the same result and what you
think about that?

You are talking about the IDE converting the 0 to "0"? Maybe that
would be a nice _option_.
AH is a Dutch grocer

;-)

--
Herfried K. Wagner
MVP · VB Classic, VB.NET
<http://www.mvps.org/dotnet>

[hexathioorthooxalate]

Hi Fergus, to clarify what I thought Cor was saying
Option logical Strict on
Dim S as String
S = 3 'produces compiler error

but

S=3.toString() 'Valid, compiles okay.

Ie. The numeric literal '3' is an object/has methods etc but importantly as
discussed in this thread, an implicit "what else could it be" .toString()
method.

===

The crux of my previous post is what <other> implicit methods would exist to
be covered by the new compiler directive "Option logical Strict on" ? And if
there are others, then the other methods available would depend on the
(object)type for '3' (whether it was an Integer, Decimal, Long etc), which
would be unknown.

For example

Dim S as String
S=3.toString() 'valid, would compile okay.
S=3.minusOne.to String() 'valid for 3=type Decimal but not 3=type Integer
But looking at the other posts in this thread, all the talk is about
..toString() so I've probably got the wrong end of the stick here.
Cheers

Hexathioorthoox alate
"Fergus Cooney" <fi****@post.co m> wrote in message
news:Oc******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP09.phx.gbl...

Hiya Hex,

I'm not sure what you're saying, but I think what Cor is saying is that
Option Strict On
Dim S as String
S = 3 'Compiler error

is Option Strict going a bit too far and that
S = 3
should do an implicit conversion (not late-bound) because "what else
<could> it be?".

Is that what you understood and were agreeing with? I couldn't really tell, I'm afraid.

Regards,
Fergus

--
(Please ignore this - there's a feud going on)
=============== =============== =============== =====
Quote of the day
Herfried:
I don't need/want human interaction.
=============== =============== =============== =====

[Herfried K. Wagner [MVP]]

* "hexathioorthoo xalate" <ru***@REMOVESP AM.clara.co.uk> scripsit:

S=3.minusOne.to String() 'valid for 3=type Decimal but not 3=type Integer

'MinusOne' is a _shared_ property. 'ToString' is an instance member.
But you can write '... = 3D.MinusOne.ToS tring()' instead.

--
Herfried K. Wagner
MVP · VB Classic, VB.NET
<http://www.mvps.org/dotnet>

[hexathioorthooxalate]

Okay, fair cop on this one :) I should have chosen a different example but
I hope the crux of the point still came over.
Hexathioorthoox alate.

"Herfried K. Wagner [MVP]" <hi************ ***@gmx.at> wrote in message
news:ef******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP12.phx.gbl...

* "hexathioorthoo xalate" <ru***@REMOVESP AM.clara.co.uk> scripsit:

S=3.minusOne.to String() 'valid for 3=type Decimal but not 3=type Integer

'MinusOne' is a _shared_ property. 'ToString' is an instance member.
But you can write '... = 3D.MinusOne.ToS tring()' instead.

--
Herfried K. Wagner
MVP · VB Classic, VB.NET
<http://www.mvps.org/dotnet>

[Herfried K. Wagner [MVP]]

* "hexathioorthoo xalate" <ru***@REMOVESP AM.clara.co.uk> scripsit:

Okay, fair cop on this one :) I should have chosen a different example but
I hope the crux of the point still came over.

It came over.

:-)

--
Herfried K. Wagner
MVP · VB Classic, VB.NET
<http://www.mvps.org/dotnet>

[Fergus Cooney]

Hiya Hex,

|| The crux of my previous post is what <other> implicit methods would exist

I agree. I've held back on my own comments because I wanted to ponder that very point
(but there's not really enough brain awake so far).

I think the point we differ on is that you're thinking of the type of the 3, while
it's the receiving type which would determine which conversion is required. I can see that
there could be clashes, not with S and 3, perhaps, but in other combinations there would
be the question 'which one?' - which is what you were getting at I believe.

That aside, this is an excellent opportunity to ask about 'Hexathioorthoo xalate'.
Hexa is the six, of course, as in benzene, thio is sulphur, oxalate is oxalic acid and
ortho is the paired carbon substitution. (All courtesy of Webster's 1913 Dictionary -
http://www.hyperdictionary.com) But I've found no web reference to the combination, nor of
course, as to why you and it are one!

Regards,
Fergus

--
(Please ignore this - there's a feud going on)
=============== =============== =============== =====
Quote of the day
Herfried:
I don't need/want human interaction.
=============== =============== =============== =====

[hexathioorthooxalate]

Just a sufficiently obscure nomme de plume for posting with origins lying in
a type of compound I used to make daily for about two years in the lab. The
generic structure looking something like this (the R's could be the same, or
different):

RS SR
\ /
RS-C-C-SR
/ \
RS SR

And under acid conditions, things sometimes get very smelly (Webster's 1913
sounds very good so will no doubt have a suitable description for "thiol"
too) - Hexathioorthoox alate is better than the obvious unflattering
'odiferous' alternatives.

Cheers

"Fergus Cooney" <fi****@post.co m> wrote in message
news:%2******** ********@tk2msf tngp13.phx.gbl. ..

Hiya Hex,

|| The crux of my previous post is what <other> implicit methods would exist
I agree. I've held back on my own comments because I wanted to ponder that very point (but there's not really enough brain awake so far).

I think the point we differ on is that you're thinking of the type of the 3, while it's the receiving type which would determine which conversion is required. I can see that there could be clashes, not with S and 3, perhaps, but in other combinations there would be the question 'which one?' - which is what you were getting at I believe.
That aside, this is an excellent opportunity to ask about 'Hexathioorthoo xalate'. Hexa is the six, of course, as in benzene, thio is sulphur, oxalate is oxalic acid and ortho is the paired carbon substitution. (All courtesy of Webster's 1913 Dictionary - http://www.hyperdictionary.com) But I've found no web reference to the combination, nor of course, as to why you and it are one!

Regards,
Fergus

--
(Please ignore this - there's a feud going on)
=============== =============== =============== =====
Quote of the day
Herfried:
I don't need/want human interaction.
=============== =============== =============== =====

[Fergus Cooney]

Hi Hex (or shall I call you Thio?)

No benzene but plenty sulphur. - garlic with mercaptan, apparently,
but I bet that was one of the least smelly!.

Cheers,
Fergus

[Tom Spink]

> You are talking about the IDE converting the 0 to "0"? Maybe that

would be a nice _option_.
Too many options these days ;-)

IMPO, We should leave it be, because where's the sense of being 'Strict' if
the IDE will butter your bread? (Where on *earth* did that cliché come from)

AH is a Dutch grocer
I like the Dutch.

--
HTH,
-- Tom Spink, Über Geek

Please respond to the newsgroup,
so all can benefit

" System.Reflecti on Master "

==== Converting to 2002 ====
Remove inline declarations
"Herfried K. Wagner [MVP]" <hi************ ***@gmx.at> wrote in message
news:#J******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP10.phx.gbl... * "Cor" <no*@non.com> scripsit: Ah... you only want an "improvemen t" of the IDE?

First not but thinking about it, it would give the same result and what you think about that?

You are talking about the IDE converting the 0 to "0"? Maybe that
would be a nice _option_.

AH is a Dutch grocer

;-)

--
Herfried K. Wagner
MVP · VB Classic, VB.NET
<http://www.mvps.org/dotnet>