>>>>>>And the product is called Visual Studio and everything is class based - what a joke.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>The fact that there isn't much visual inheritance in VS does not make it a joke. The visual is the preview that you have in all of your design efforts. I like the fact that everything is class-based.
>>>>
>>>>Well said. Besides, how often do we subclass GUI components (in any development environment)?
>>>
>>>Very often if you really follow OOP. In fact you never use a base class if you can help it. You inherit not cut and paste if you want to change/modify functionality.
>>
>>Thank you for the tutorial but I didn't just fall off the turnip truck, Bernard. I am quite familiar with the principles of OOP. One of the things that might be said about it is that excessive use of inheritance is the sign of a neophyte. (Not directing that at those who posted yesterday in favor of inheriting base classes two levels, one for the company and one for projects within a company; I like that). Done improperly, you can quickly wind up with a maze of classes that aren't a lot more maintainable than "spaghetti code" in the old days.
>
>True. Un necessary subclassing for the sake of subclassing is not what I mean.
>
>One level to build a set of base classes and another for functionality. At the extreme 3 levels though I have only sometimes used that.
>
>For example - 3 levels (my max)
>
>1. Subclass the base classes
>2. Add functionality to these after subclassing for use in a particular project
>3. Combining from 2 to create a user control only if it will be reused at least once.
>
>For instance in a ERP club management system, level 2 would give say a text control functionality and themes for the project.
>
>For the POS screens the text controls from 2 would be combined as a user control and used in a number of screens across the project giving them all the same look and feel.
>
>After 3 levels it becomes spaghetti and too difficult to maintain.

We are in agreement.