On 2001-12-13 15:06, dagsverre wrote:
My eyes! MY EYES!!! What was that up there?
If "message" must be an implicit variable, much like "result" in Delphi...so that only the last assignment to message in the function is shown, and not until the function exits...then *perhaps* it could pass as a "good-intention-that-failed" thing. I fear that that is not the case though, in which case it's the stupidest syntax I've seen until now.
Private Sub Command1_Click()
MsgBox "Congratulations! You've just activated a virus that will blow up the galaxy!!"
End Sub
On 2001-12-15 06:16, Joey wrote:
I'm afarid that you are right. But VB has more detailed error messages, giving you less debugging headache. The mystery: VB's undo code is not found anywhere. Anyone knows?
Actually, MS meant to use VB alongside with VC++. Just make and OCX through C++, and VB can use it! Made a buggy program with VB? No problem! A compile option lets you debug it with VC++.
VB also has what VC++ have. But instead of libraries, VB uses ActiveX controls.
Personally, I like VB because it is easier to understand that VC++(which, until now, I don't really understand it either. Care to teach me?)
The only difference between VB and VC++ is that VC++ programs has the ability to wear "skins"(Typically, it isn't the "true" interface like VB, it's just a bunch of bitmaps.) and also that in VB it is harder to create a new object than how you do it in VC++.
Public Type sh*tVB
NumEntries As Integer
Entries(1 to NumEntries) As Long
End Type