Boo! On AcceptButton Property Name


DevX Home    Today's Headlines   Articles Archive   Tip Bank   Forums   

Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Boo! On AcceptButton Property Name

  1. #1
    Jonathan Wood Guest

    Boo! On AcceptButton Property Name

    <rant>
    Well, we've certainly heard a lot about gratuitous changes lately.

    After considerable time, I finally found out how to make a default button in
    C#. You set the form's AcceptButton property to the name of the button.

    VB has always called this a Default property, the API calls it the
    BS_DEFPUSHBUTTON style, MFC uses the same approach.

    No wonder it's taking me so long to find stuff.
    </rant>

    --
    Jonathan Wood
    SoftCircuits Programming
    http://www.softcircuits.com



  2. #2
    Jonathan Wood Guest

    Re: Boo! On AcceptButton Property Name

    Michael,

    > Well, this would not count as a gratitutous change.... since its always

    been
    > this way. Perhaps a "gratuitously confusing insert?" <g>


    Always been this way? Where was that?

    --
    Jonathan Wood
    SoftCircuits Programming
    http://www.softcircuits.com



  3. #3
    Mark Burns Guest

    Re: Boo! On AcceptButton Property Name


    "Michael (michka) Kaplan" <former_mvp@spamfree.trigeminal.nospam.com> wrote
    in message news:3a7a5eeb$1@news.devx.com...
    > Always in C#, I mean.


    rofl! <sarcasm>yeah...and we all know and appreciate the long history and
    millions of apps that C# has!</sarcasm>



  4. #4
    Jonathan Wood Guest

    Re: Boo! On AcceptButton Property Name

    Actually, this appears to be a change in VB.NET as well.

    Wouldn't it have made more sense to call it the DefaultButton property since
    this is what everyone has been calling it up until now?

    --
    Jonathan Wood
    SoftCircuits Programming
    http://www.softcircuits.com
    "Michael (michka) Kaplan" <former_mvp@spamfree.trigeminal.nospam.com> wrote
    in message news:3a7a5eeb$1@news.devx.com...
    > Always in C#, I mean.
    >
    > --
    > MichKa
    >
    > a new book on internationalization in VB at
    > http://www.i18nWithVB.com/
    >
    > "Jonathan Wood" <jwood@softcircuits.com> wrote in message
    > news:3a7a5e7a@news.devx.com...
    > > Michael,
    > >
    > > > Well, this would not count as a gratitutous change.... since its

    always
    > > been
    > > > this way. Perhaps a "gratuitously confusing insert?" <g>

    > >
    > > Always been this way? Where was that?
    > >
    > > --
    > > Jonathan Wood
    > > SoftCircuits Programming
    > > http://www.softcircuits.com
    > >
    > >

    >
    >




  5. #5
    Larry Triezenberg Guest

    Re: Boo! On AcceptButton Property Name

    You seem to be missing the whole point of Gratuitous Incompatibilities...

    "Jonathan Wood" <jwood@softcircuits.com> wrote in message
    news:3a7aee70$1@news.devx.com...
    > Actually, this appears to be a change in VB.NET as well.
    >
    > Wouldn't it have made more sense to call it the DefaultButton property since
    > this is what everyone has been calling it up until now?




  6. #6
    Patrick Troughton Guest

    Re: Boo! On AcceptButton Property Name


    I wish we could say the same about all the Gratuitous Whining! Seriously,
    .NET was not designed from the perspective of VB. I wrote up a small but
    excellent explanation regarding the _true_ nature of the "changes" to VB.
    With perhaps one modification*, the post stands up today. Do a search on
    "grafted" in the old VB7 newsgroup...

    /Pat

    *The modification being about the new property syntax.

    "Larry Triezenberg" <ltriezenberg@pathsys.com> wrote:
    >You seem to be missing the whole point of Gratuitous Incompatibilities...
    >
    >"Jonathan Wood" <jwood@softcircuits.com> wrote in message
    >news:3a7aee70$1@news.devx.com...
    >> Actually, this appears to be a change in VB.NET as well.
    >>
    >> Wouldn't it have made more sense to call it the DefaultButton property

    since
    >> this is what everyone has been calling it up until now?




  7. #7
    Jonathan Allen Guest

    Re: Boo! On AcceptButton Property Name

    I just looked at AccpetButton and CancelButton, and I have to say I really
    like the change. First of all, it puts the property on the form where it
    belongs. Having a Default and Cancel property on every button was just
    silly. Secondly, it makes things a lot more flexible. Having an IButton
    interface makes it possible to create your own custom buttons.

    --
    Jonathan Allen


    "Jonathan Wood" <jwood@softcircuits.com> wrote in message
    news:3a798d2f@news.devx.com...
    > <rant>
    > Well, we've certainly heard a lot about gratuitous changes lately.
    >
    > After considerable time, I finally found out how to make a default button

    in
    > C#. You set the form's AcceptButton property to the name of the button.
    >
    > VB has always called this a Default property, the API calls it the
    > BS_DEFPUSHBUTTON style, MFC uses the same approach.
    >
    > No wonder it's taking me so long to find stuff.
    > </rant>
    >
    > --
    > Jonathan Wood
    > SoftCircuits Programming
    > http://www.softcircuits.com
    >
    >




  8. #8
    Jonathan Wood Guest

    Re: Boo! On AcceptButton Property Name

    I don't disagree with your reasoning. I like it too.

    But my point was that there is a standard of calling default buttons
    "Default." Therefore, that change seems gratuitous to me and made it very
    hard to find this property when I needed.

    What would be wrong with DefaultButton?

    Jonathan

    "Jonathan Allen" <greywolfcs@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
    news:3a7b0f0a@news.devx.com...
    > I just looked at AccpetButton and CancelButton, and I have to say I really
    > like the change. First of all, it puts the property on the form where it
    > belongs. Having a Default and Cancel property on every button was just
    > silly. Secondly, it makes things a lot more flexible. Having an IButton
    > interface makes it possible to create your own custom buttons.
    >
    > --
    > Jonathan Allen
    >
    >
    > "Jonathan Wood" <jwood@softcircuits.com> wrote in message
    > news:3a798d2f@news.devx.com...
    > > <rant>
    > > Well, we've certainly heard a lot about gratuitous changes lately.
    > >
    > > After considerable time, I finally found out how to make a default

    button
    > in
    > > C#. You set the form's AcceptButton property to the name of the button.
    > >
    > > VB has always called this a Default property, the API calls it the
    > > BS_DEFPUSHBUTTON style, MFC uses the same approach.
    > >
    > > No wonder it's taking me so long to find stuff.
    > > </rant>
    > >
    > > --
    > > Jonathan Wood
    > > SoftCircuits Programming
    > > http://www.softcircuits.com
    > >
    > >

    >
    >




  9. #9
    Jonathan Allen Guest

    Re: Boo! On AcceptButton Property Name

    > What would be wrong with DefaultButton?

    That depends on how you define Default. You could think of the default
    button as the one that has the focus when the form is loaded, which is set
    by the tab order.

    --
    Jonathan Allen


    "Jonathan Wood" <jwood@softcircuits.com> wrote in message
    news:3a7b1271@news.devx.com...
    > I don't disagree with your reasoning. I like it too.
    >
    > But my point was that there is a standard of calling default buttons
    > "Default." Therefore, that change seems gratuitous to me and made it very
    > hard to find this property when I needed.
    >
    > What would be wrong with DefaultButton?
    >
    > Jonathan
    >
    > "Jonathan Allen" <greywolfcs@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
    > news:3a7b0f0a@news.devx.com...
    > > I just looked at AccpetButton and CancelButton, and I have to say I

    really
    > > like the change. First of all, it puts the property on the form where it
    > > belongs. Having a Default and Cancel property on every button was just
    > > silly. Secondly, it makes things a lot more flexible. Having an IButton
    > > interface makes it possible to create your own custom buttons.
    > >
    > > --
    > > Jonathan Allen
    > >
    > >
    > > "Jonathan Wood" <jwood@softcircuits.com> wrote in message
    > > news:3a798d2f@news.devx.com...
    > > > <rant>
    > > > Well, we've certainly heard a lot about gratuitous changes lately.
    > > >
    > > > After considerable time, I finally found out how to make a default

    > button
    > > in
    > > > C#. You set the form's AcceptButton property to the name of the

    button.
    > > >
    > > > VB has always called this a Default property, the API calls it the
    > > > BS_DEFPUSHBUTTON style, MFC uses the same approach.
    > > >
    > > > No wonder it's taking me so long to find stuff.
    > > > </rant>
    > > >
    > > > --
    > > > Jonathan Wood
    > > > SoftCircuits Programming
    > > > http://www.softcircuits.com
    > > >
    > > >

    > >
    > >

    >
    >




  10. #10
    Karl E. Peterson Guest

    Re: Boo! On AcceptButton Property Name

    Jeeesh! Just be glad they didn't call it the "SubmitButton". ;-)
    --
    http://www.mvps.org/vb


    "Jonathan Wood" <jwood@softcircuits.com> wrote in message
    news:3a7b1271@news.devx.com...
    > I don't disagree with your reasoning. I like it too.
    >
    > But my point was that there is a standard of calling default buttons
    > "Default." Therefore, that change seems gratuitous to me and made it very
    > hard to find this property when I needed.
    >
    > What would be wrong with DefaultButton?
    >
    > Jonathan
    >
    > "Jonathan Allen" <greywolfcs@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
    > news:3a7b0f0a@news.devx.com...
    > > I just looked at AccpetButton and CancelButton, and I have to say I really
    > > like the change. First of all, it puts the property on the form where it
    > > belongs. Having a Default and Cancel property on every button was just
    > > silly. Secondly, it makes things a lot more flexible. Having an IButton
    > > interface makes it possible to create your own custom buttons.
    > >
    > > --
    > > Jonathan Allen
    > >
    > >
    > > "Jonathan Wood" <jwood@softcircuits.com> wrote in message
    > > news:3a798d2f@news.devx.com...
    > > > <rant>
    > > > Well, we've certainly heard a lot about gratuitous changes lately.
    > > >
    > > > After considerable time, I finally found out how to make a default

    > button
    > > in
    > > > C#. You set the form's AcceptButton property to the name of the button.
    > > >
    > > > VB has always called this a Default property, the API calls it the
    > > > BS_DEFPUSHBUTTON style, MFC uses the same approach.
    > > >
    > > > No wonder it's taking me so long to find stuff.
    > > > </rant>
    > > >
    > > > --
    > > > Jonathan Wood
    > > > SoftCircuits Programming
    > > > http://www.softcircuits.com
    > > >
    > > >

    > >
    > >

    >
    >



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
HTML5 Development Center
 
 
FAQ
Latest Articles
Java
.NET
XML
Database
Enterprise
Questions? Contact us.
C++
Web Development
Wireless
Latest Tips
Open Source


   Development Centers

   -- Android Development Center
   -- Cloud Development Project Center
   -- HTML5 Development Center
   -- Windows Mobile Development Center