That was what we needed to do when coding then in C#, because that is what the vb compiler generates when it sees a Module definition (generate a StandardModule-attributed class with all methods static and no constructor), but now that it is compiled in VB proper, I think we should leave for the compiler to do the job.
:) On 8/26/06, Kornél Pál <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > Currently all modules in VB runtime are declared as > > <StandardModule()> _ > Public NotInheritable Class <name> > > while they could be declared as > > Public Module <name> > > Also note that Classes have constructors while Modules not. (Modules are > much like static classes in C# but members of Modules have global scope.) > > Is there any reason to declare Modules as Classes? > > Kornél > > _______________________________________________ > Mono-vb mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-vb > -- Rafael "Monoman" Teixeira --------------------------------------- "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." George Bernard Shaw _______________________________________________ Mono-vb mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-vb
