Hmmm... a couple things...

True, VB is not Object oriented, rather it is object based (as is
mentioned later in this thread). As I understand it, this is
because VB's object model VERY closely reflects the object
strategy implemented in COM. It is true that COM (and VB) does
not support implementation inheritance, but both do support
interface inheritance.

From our VFP perspective, this con seem quite restricting, yet
I have seen this approach described as an advantage. Appearantly,
implementation inheritance exposes a parent's details to the
child object and therefore can break encapsulation (I still
like having implementation inheritance, though).

As far as multiple inheritance is concerned, you can bet I'd
find it quite convenient. I shudder to think of the number of
times I've had to duplicate the same method calls in all of
my 1st level subclassed controls. I can live without it, though.
When I properly think through my Object/Class hierarchies, I
rarely find that they are necessary.

- Chris Holtz


>>So then it's safe to say that VB is NOT an Object Oriented Language?
>
>Right. It's object-based, and it is possible to use OO programming strategies, but strictly speaking, VB isn't OO. Of course, strictly speaking, neither is VFP. :-)
>
>Better to concentrate on what the tools can do, than on what they can't...