Probably true - but an extension method gets round Dmitry's naming problem :-}

>Since this won't be used very frequently, I would stay away from extension methods in this case and create a separate class to handle encrypt/decrypt
>
>>Actually sounds like a candidate for an extension method on string:

    public static class DmitryExtensions
>>    {
>>        public static string Encode (this string s)
>>        {
>>            //Return encoded here
>>            return s;
>>        }
>>        public static string Decode(this string s)
>>        {
>>            //Return decoded here
>>            return s;
>>        }
>>    }

Called like:

    string text = "Hello".Encode();
>>    private string y = text.Decode();
>>
>>    //You can also chain (thought not much sense in this particular context)
>>    private string chained = "Hello".Encode().Decode();

If the methods will be used in other projects put them in their own DLL and reference that when you need the methods.....
>>
>>
>>
>>>My class String has two methods Encode and Decode where I can encode and decode a string. The encode and decode code has to be the "same" as my VFP code (to make ASP.NET compatible with VFP app). So I use my class String as following:
>>>
>>>

>>>cPassword = "ABCD";
>>>string Decoded;
>>>Decoded = MyNameSpace.String.Decoded( cPassword );