"ZR" <zd***********@zio.hr> schrieb:
I don't work for Microsoft so I can't guarantee that my theory is correct
:-)
But I don't see a point in introducing new syntax with .NET if they don't
plan to remove the old
snytax (which does the same thing) sooner or later - perhaps they won't
remove VB6 leftover
functions like MsgBox, only won't "recommend" using them (whatever that
would mean)
I don't think these functions are leftover functions. Would you consider
C#'s and VB.NET's syntax as "leftover" syntax of C, Java, and VB6? Why not
just use IL assembler for development? It's the only .NET programming
language that doesn't suffer from the "leftover" thingy. The intention and
benefit of .NET is not that code looks the same in all .NET programming
languages. If this was the goal, there would only be IL assembler or a more
high-level programming language available. The main point of .NET is
interoperability of components developed using different .NET-enabled
programming languages. It doesn't matter whether or not you are using
'MsgBox' or 'MessageBox' instead. It matters that you are using managed
code with all of its benefits.
--
M S Herfried K. Wagner
M V P <URL:http://dotnet.mvps.org/>
V B <URL:http://classicvb.org/petition/>