Ken:

PMFJI, but it just seems that any point that anyone puts forward for VB.net, you just pooh-pooh it for the sake of it. If you wanna do C# then do it. You asked for folks in this thread to justify their opinions on VB.net and as far as I can see, they have. They're not twisting your arm to do anything.

>I think that the VB.NET team is very interested in how VFP does its thing...
>
>I'm sure they are - I KNOW they are - and perhaps that's my point. If VFP team is getting tight with the VB .Net team - especially if that's where they're gonna land one day - then that would explain the bias I'm seeing
>
>I disagree. Namespaces are easier to deal with in VB.NET - the VFPToolkit demonstrates this well. And what about the tools that are provided <snip>
>
>Wow - I guess I'm having no problems with namespaces in C# - certainly no harder than a "set classlib to" in VFP.
>I just spent some time seeing quite a few things C# did that VB either didn't do or didn't do nearly as well - I would have to go back and look at notes to tell you all the details - but my point is that the "easier/better" thing probably works both ways.
>
>If you won't use it in a production app, don't you at least see it as useful in order to learn how to do things in .NET like string manipulation or accessing data? I think it's good sample code at the very least.
>
>Now this may be a good point! But, exactly why do you think it is easier to use in VB? What is difficult about using it in C#? It's just a set of classes, right?