Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Jonathan West, post: 6932290"] What is supposed to happen is that the WordBasic code is automatucally converted to VBA when you first open a template in version of Word later than Word 95. The conversion actually happens. The resulting code is horrid to look at. It's also a bit of a lottery whether it will continue to run. A 10-line macro will probably be OK. A 100-line macro is distinctly iffy. For a 1000-line application, you can bet your bottom dollar that something has broken. That said, the quality of the conversion was a great deal better than Microsoft managed with the Migration Wizard between VB6 and VB.NET, which were supposedly consecutive versions of the same language. Logically that would be the sensible course for Microsoft. But having seen what they did to VB.NET, and continued to do even after they were told in no uncertain terms by a lot of VB developers what a disaster it would be, I can no longer assume that logic is always a factor in Microsoft's decision-making process. If you need to keep the older version around in order to be able to run VBA, effectively that means in a corporate environment that your organization will never upgrade to the new version. It might be that Microsot has had its fingers burnt, and they have decided to pull back on taking Office full speed into the .NET world. There is no sign that the Visual Studio group are learning from the VB.NET experience, I understand that new incompatibilities have been introduced into the new "Whidbey" version of VB.NET out on beta test. But it might be that the Office group (who are after all responsible for about a third of all Microsoft revenue) have decided they need to take a more conservative line. Nobody wants to be the executive who killed Office. [/QUOTE]

Verification