The target in the base project file is net46.

Unless I'm wrong and I've misunderstood?

while the base does say net46, it could be overridden but I honestly don't remember if we did....

Google suggests not...

@MathieuGuindon btw, "no" to what (excuse my ignorance!)

I assume to Quebec independence.

Quebec is basically Canada's equivalent of Scotland

or to US & PR

ah ok. need to research... I'd love to migrate to Canada, and have a family opportunity.

@this yep

what I do find curious is how Quebec managed to stay so French compared with say, Louisiana. I know there are some who might know creole but French isn't really spoken widely, not even within New Orleans.

Dear VBA, why can't you just be truely strongly typed?

@M.Doerner because coercion. Kthxbye, VBA.

Fixing up the resolver for situations with broken code in which the VBE does not complain turned out to be much more complicated than anticipated.

Coersion is not the real problem.

bah, I tried, I failed.

The compiler just ignores any type error or missing member errors for objects and defers resolution to runtime.

Woosh, can you provide an example?

Define any class Class1 and Class2. Then Set assigne a variable of type Class1 to one of Class2.

That compiles without any error.

At runtime, it failes, obviously.

You can also have cls As Class1 and do cls(0) without any default member on Class1.

It compiles, but fails at runtime.

what is the complications you're dealing with?

Well, unless you assign an object of a class implementing Class2 that itself has a default member.

The index access resolution gets complicated.

I assume we're bailing out as soon as we hit a variant or an object.

The way it was written so far, the later cases assumed that all valid possibilities for the earlier cases ware already covered.

However, it was not considered that the earlier cases failed because the code was broken in a way that still compiled.

Yes

But you have the loose typing for all class types.