MsgBox("test") no msg box?

**Aaron** · Jan 18 '06, 08:16 AM

Re: MsgBox("te st") no msg box?

Boki,

try this

Private Sub button1_Click(B yVal sender As System.Object, ByVal e As
System.EventArg s) Handles button1.Click

Messagebox.Show ("Hello, World")

End Sub

<bokiteam@ms21. hinet.net> wrote in message
news:1137570490 .479621.196020@ g47g2000cwa.goo glegroups.com.. .[color=blue]
> Hi All,
>
> I dont' know why I can not pop up a message box.
>
> MsgBox("test")
>
> it is ok in vb6...
>
> Best regards,
> Boki.
>[/color]

**bokiteam@ms21.hinet.net** · Jan 18 '06, 08:25 AM

Re: MsgBox("te st") no msg box?

Got it, thanks a lot. :)

Best regards,
Boki.

**Cor Ligthert [MVP]** · Jan 18 '06, 09:25 AM

Re: MsgBox("te st") no msg box?

Boki,

MsgBox("test") works for me

Although I never use it, I use messagebox.show

I have no reason for that, it are more charachters so mostly I use the
shorter one.

I hope this helps,

Cor

**Herfried K. Wagner [MVP]** · Jan 18 '06, 09:45 AM

Re: MsgBox("te st") no msg box?

<bokiteam@ms21. hinet.net> schrieb:[color=blue]
> I dont' know why I can not pop up a message box.
>
> MsgBox("test")
>
> it is ok in vb6...[/color]

It should work in VB.NET too. Where are you calling 'MsgBox'?

--
M S Herfried K. Wagner
M V P <URL:http://dotnet.mvps.org/>
V B <URL:http://classicvb.org/petition/>

**Patrice** · Jan 18 '06, 10:25 AM

Re: MsgBox("te st") no msg box?

It should work. Always indicates what happens instead of just syaing it
doesn't work.

This is in the MicroftVisualBa sic namespcae. I velive you din"t have a
reference to this making tuhis function unklnown...

--

<bokiteam@ms21. hinet.net> a écrit dans le message de
news:1137570490 .479621.196020@ g47g2000cwa.goo glegroups.com.. .[color=blue]
> Hi All,
>
> I dont' know why I can not pop up a message box.
>
> MsgBox("test")
>
> it is ok in vb6...
>
> Best regards,
> Boki.
>[/color]

ZR · Jan 18 '06, 01:35 PM

Re: MsgBox("te st") no msg box?

Msgbox is an old syntax - it works in VB.NET 2003 if you have
Microsoft.Visua lBasic imported, but merely for compatibility reasons and may
not be supported in future versions.
Messagebox.Show is the correct VB.NET syntax that people should use.

**Herfried K. Wagner [MVP]** · Jan 18 '06, 01:45 PM

Re: MsgBox("te st") no msg box?

"ZR" <zdenko.rupcic@ zio.hr> schrieb:[color=blue]
> Msgbox is an old syntax - it works in VB.NET 2003 if you have
> Microsoft.Visua lBasic imported, but merely for compatibility reasons and
> may not be supported in future versions.
> Messagebox.Show is the correct VB.NET syntax that people should use.[/color]

Sorry, but that's complete nonsense. "Microsoft.Visu alBasic.dll" is not the
Visual Basic Compatibility Library
("Microsoft.Vis ualBasic.Compat ibility.dll"). It's part of Visual Basic .NET
and there are no public plans to remove this library, as parts of it are
strongly tied to the Visual Basic .NET programming language. Using
"Microsoft.Visu alBasic.dll" is perfectly legitimate in VB.NET.

--
M S Herfried K. Wagner
M V P <URL:http://dotnet.mvps.org/>
V B <URL:http://classicvb.org/petition/>

ZR · Jan 19 '06, 09:05 AM

Re: MsgBox("te st") no msg box?

I was commenting the possible removal of Msgbox, NOT the removal of the
actual library where it is placed - now I see that wasn't very clear in my
previous post.

"Herfried K. Wagner [MVP]" <hirf-spam-me-here@gmx.at> wrote in message
news:OkK%23VNDH GHA.3100@tk2msf tngp13.phx.gbl. ..[color=blue]
> "ZR" <zdenko.rupcic@ zio.hr> schrieb:[color=green]
>> Msgbox is an old syntax - it works in VB.NET 2003 if you have
>> Microsoft.Visua lBasic imported, but merely for compatibility reasons and
>> may not be supported in future versions.
>> Messagebox.Show is the correct VB.NET syntax that people should use.[/color]
>
> Sorry, but that's complete nonsense. "Microsoft.Visu alBasic.dll" is not
> the Visual Basic Compatibility Library
> ("Microsoft.Vis ualBasic.Compat ibility.dll"). It's part of Visual Basic
> .NET and there are no public plans to remove this library, as parts of it
> are strongly tied to the Visual Basic .NET programming language. Using
> "Microsoft.Visu alBasic.dll" is perfectly legitimate in VB.NET.
>
> --
> M S Herfried K. Wagner
> M V P <URL:http://dotnet.mvps.org/>
> V B <URL:http://classicvb.org/petition/>[/color]

**Herfried K. Wagner [MVP]** · Jan 19 '06, 11:05 AM

Re: MsgBox("te st") no msg box?

"ZR" <zdenko.rupcic@ zio.hr> schrieb:[color=blue]
>I was commenting the possible removal of Msgbox, NOT the removal of the
>actual library where it is placed - now I see that wasn't very clear in my
>previous post.[/color]

Well, I cannot think of any reason why 'MsgBox' should be removed. It's not
part of the compatibility library. 'MsgBox' exists even longer than
'MessageBox.Sho w', and I believe it will stay longer than 'MessageBox.Sho w'
because it's not tied to a certain technology. Technologies fade, languages
(should) persist.

--
M S Herfried K. Wagner
M V P <URL:http://dotnet.mvps.org/>
V B <URL:http://classicvb.org/petition/>

ZR · Jan 20 '06, 02:05 PM

Re: MsgBox("te st") no msg box?

I don't work for Microsoft so I can't guarantee that my theory is correct
:-)
But I don't see a point in introducing new syntax with .NET if they don't
plan to remove the old
snytax (which does the same thing) sooner or later - perhaps they won't
remove VB6 leftover
functions like MsgBox, only won't "recommend" using them (whatever that
would mean)

"Herfried K. Wagner [MVP]" <hirf-spam-me-here@gmx.at> wrote in message
news:%23HvbRYOH GHA.1288@TK2MSF TNGP09.phx.gbl. ..[color=blue]
> "ZR" <zdenko.rupcic@ zio.hr> schrieb:[color=green]
>>I was commenting the possible removal of Msgbox, NOT the removal of the
>>actual library where it is placed - now I see that wasn't very clear in my
>>previous post.[/color]
>
> Well, I cannot think of any reason why 'MsgBox' should be removed. It's
> not part of the compatibility library. 'MsgBox' exists even longer than
> 'MessageBox.Sho w', and I believe it will stay longer than
> 'MessageBox.Sho w' because it's not tied to a certain technology.
> Technologies fade, languages (should) persist.
>
> --
> M S Herfried K. Wagner
> M V P <URL:http://dotnet.mvps.org/>
> V B <URL:http://classicvb.org/petition/>[/color]

**Cor Ligthert [MVP]** · Jan 20 '06, 02:47 PM

Re: MsgBox("te st") no msg box?

ZR
[color=blue]
>I don't work for Microsoft so I can't guarantee that my theory is correct
>:-)
> But I don't see a point in introducing new syntax with .NET if they don't
> plan to remove the old
> snytax (which does the same thing) sooner or later - perhaps they won't
> remove VB6 leftover[/color]

We have not seen any official information if either messagebox.show or
msgbox will be replaced.

There is as well not given any information, if both will stay or both in
future will completely be replaced by another class.

Even if it is as you write, than they probably will be directly converted to
what is needed in the version upgrade part.

Therefore all what you have read about this or think is just guessing in the
same way as that Saint Nicolas is retiring in future and will be replaced by
Saint John.

However we have seen a lot of this guessing here.

I hope this gives an idea.

Cor

**Herfried K. Wagner [MVP]** · Jan 20 '06, 03:35 PM

Re: MsgBox("te st") no msg box?

"ZR" <zdenko.rupcic@ zio.hr> schrieb:[color=blue]
>I don't work for Microsoft so I can't guarantee that my theory is correct
>:-)
> But I don't see a point in introducing new syntax with .NET if they don't
> plan to remove the old
> snytax (which does the same thing) sooner or later - perhaps they won't
> remove VB6 leftover
> functions like MsgBox, only won't "recommend" using them (whatever that
> would mean)[/color]

I don't think these functions are leftover functions. Would you consider
C#'s and VB.NET's syntax as "leftover" syntax of C, Java, and VB6? Why not
just use IL assembler for development? It's the only .NET programming
language that doesn't suffer from the "leftover" thingy. The intention and
benefit of .NET is not that code looks the same in all .NET programming
languages. If this was the goal, there would only be IL assembler or a more
high-level programming language available. The main point of .NET is
interoperabilit y of components developed using different .NET-enabled
programming languages. It doesn't matter whether or not you are using
'MsgBox' or 'MessageBox' instead. It matters that you are using managed
code with all of its benefits.

--
M S Herfried K. Wagner
M V P <URL:http://dotnet.mvps.org/>
V B <URL:http://classicvb.org/petition/>

MsgBox("test") no msg box?

MsgBox("test") no msg box?

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment