###Usage

###Bonus

#UPDATE

###Don't do this at home.

Usage

Bonus

UPDATE

Don't do this at home.

Because I was spoiled with C# and the .NET framework, whenever I have to work with VB6 I feel like something's missing in the language. A little while ago I implemented a List<T> for VB6 (here), and before that I implemented String.Format() and a number of string-helper functions (here). Don't go looking for a StringFormat method in the VB6 language specs, that method is the one I've written.

That mechanism is borrowed from the List<T> implementation I wrote before, and proved to be working fine. Shortly put, an instance of the Nullable class is a Nullable<Variant> until it's assigned a value - if that value is a Integer then the instance becomes a Nullable<Integer> and remains of that type - so the Value can only be assigned an Integer. The mechanism can be refined as shown here, to be more flexible (i.e. more VB-like), but for now I only wanted something that works.

Because I was spoiled with C# and the .NET framework, whenever I have to work with VB6 I feel like something's missing in the language. A little while ago I implemented a List<T> for VB6 (here), and before that I implemented String.Format() and a number of string-helper functions (here). Don't go looking for a StringFormat method in the VB6 language specs, that method is the one I've written.

That mechanism is borrowed from the List<T> implementation I wrote before, and proved to be working fine. Shortly put, an instance of the Nullable class is a Nullable<Variant> until it's assigned a value - if that value is a Integer then the instance becomes a Nullable<Integer> and remains of that type - so the Value can only be assigned an Integer. The mechanism can be refined as shown here, to be more flexible (i.e. more VB-like), but for now I only wanted something that works.

#UPDATE

###Don't do this at home.

After a thorough review, it appears an Emptyable<T> in VB6 is absolutely moot. All the class is buying, is a HasValue member, which VB6 already takes care of, with its IsEmpty() function.

Basically, instead of having a Nullable<Boolean> and doing MyNullable.HasValue, just declare a Boolean and assign it to Empty, and verify "emptiness" with IsEmpty(MyBoolean).