Hank:

>I like Martin's reply best of all: they goofed on the visual designers in Winforms (they should have asked the VFP team, who had learned how to do it right <s> -- that's my take on it), as they did on other area where they did not have deep experience (think: data handling). And except for those few things and some others, as the song goes, everything's going great!
>

Indeed. To me, too, it now appears that the inherent .NET OOP architecture is fine and consistent, it is the visual designer that is not compliant in all cases. How could this "minor" thing have happened, and even more puzzling, why hasn't it been fixed in 2 major versions by a Redmond -load of very talented developers. It is, well, puzzling. But as Martin also mentioned, most .Net developers are using custom controls and evidently don't inherit (at least visually) from them, so it is, largely, a non issue in .NET circles.

I just keep thinking back on one of the classic explanations of OOP's architectural superiority, the one where you have already developed a whole lot of forms in a project, when your client tells you that they want you to use a different font across the application. Tomorrow, preferably today. You change the font in the appropriate baseclasses in a few minutes and move on. You didn't need in any way to prepare for this type of situation as you were (visually) building the forms, it is handled automatically by the inheritance chain.


Pertti

P.S. I got a kick out of that song