>>>>Hi.
>>>>
>>>>does it make any sense to have mdot used like this
>>>>

>>>>m.ObjName1.Name2()
>>>>

>>>>?
>>>
>>>Lutz, in 1001 words? Yes.
>>
>>:O Question was to unspecific.
>>
>>Objname. would do the same for not much extra work.
>
>Err... no, it wouldn't...
>
>With IntellisenseX, you write mdot, the memory variables and parameters in scope show up in the list.

But if the variable is declared AS, IntellisenseX pics the right PEMs anyway. It's more about the PEM's then the locals, I can remember (or even see) the locals more often. :) mdot expansion is a pain to me, but this is my preference.

>>But this is a design time problem. Since design time is more or less copy'n'paste action to me, I found those expansion of minor use.
>>
>>Question was about run time.
>
>If the question is only for run time, no, there is no particular gain in having the mdot on the left side.
>
>It's as useless as tabs and spaces on the left side of a statement. You can safely get rid of these, too. ;)

This is, I hate that BeautifyX adds mdot to any method call (or array). It's not to tricky to remove it (much less then in SQL SELECT. That's havoc.), but the question was if it made sense. It would even be fine if one use mdot expansion with IntellisenseX and remove it afterwards with BeautifyX.