Converting and Integer to String in VBA

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

VexedFist - 28 Mar 2007 02:43 GMT

I have a MACRO I wrote in MS-Word 2003.

I am trying to figure out how to convert an Integer iNum to a Strin sNum.

Any help would be appreciated

Reply to this Message

macropod - 28 Mar 2007 11:09 GMT

Sub Test()
Dim iNum As Integer
Dim sNum As String
iNum = 50
sNum = iNum
MsgBox sNum
End Sub

Cheers

Signature

macropod
[MVP - Microsoft Word]
-------------------------

>I have a MACRO I wrote in MS-Word 2003.
>
> I am trying to figure out how to convert an Integer iNum to a Strin sNum.
>
> Any help would be appreciated

Reply to this Message

old man - 28 Mar 2007 20:52 GMT

Who am I to argue with MVPs? Cstr is usually better since you a trimmed
string. Macropd is correct that there are automatic conversions but people
who depend on automatic conversions are like people who drive without seat
belts - one day they may regret it.

old man

> Sub Test()
> Dim iNum As Integer
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> >
> > Any help would be appreciated

Reply to this Message

Karl E. Peterson - 28 Mar 2007 22:05 GMT

> Who am I to argue with MVPs? Cstr is usually better since you a trimmed
> string. Macropd is correct that there are automatic conversions but people
> who depend on automatic conversions are like people who drive without seat
> belts - one day they may regret it.

Google "coercion aversion" sometime <g> to find a case where:

A + B + 1 <> 1 + A + B

(Despite the ugly typo in the subhead.)

When VB5 entered a pre-alpha state, given the debacle of VB4's ETC, we were
*strongly* arguing for an Option Anal or Option ExplicitDamnItForReal to force all
coercions be explicit. Unfortuantely, they didn't see the wisdom in that. :-(

Signature

.NET: It's About Trust!
http://vfred.mvps.org

Reply to this Message

old man - 28 Mar 2007 23:20 GMT

well you can set explicit conversions required in vb.net

old man

> > Who am I to argue with MVPs? Cstr is usually better since you a trimmed
> > string. Macropd is correct that there are automatic conversions but people
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> *strongly* arguing for an Option Anal or Option ExplicitDamnItForReal to force all
> coercions be explicit. Unfortuantely, they didn't see the wisdom in that. :-(

Reply to this Message

Karl E. Peterson - 29 Mar 2007 00:25 GMT

> well you can set explicit conversions required in vb.net

Yeah, unfortunately, you can't use your VB code there. :-(

Signature

.NET: It's About Trust!
http://vfred.mvps.org

Reply to this Message

macropod - 29 Mar 2007 13:24 GMT

True, a purist might use something like:
Sub Test()
Dim iNum As Integer
Dim sNum As String
iNum = 50
sNum =cStr( iNum)
MsgBox sNum
End Sub

As for automatic conversions, I've heard much the same line about automatic transmissions in cars...

Cheers

Signature

macropod
[MVP - Microsoft Word]
-------------------------

> Who am I to argue with MVPs? Cstr is usually better since you a trimmed
> string. Macropd is correct that there are automatic conversions but people
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
>> >
>> > Any help would be appreciated

Reply to this Message

Karl E. Peterson - 29 Mar 2007 22:15 GMT

> True, a purist might use something like:

That's belittling.

> Sub Test()
> Dim iNum As Integer
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> MsgBox sNum
> End Sub

Maybe you're a newb, in which case such arrogance is understandable, but it wasn't
until VB4's introduction of Evil Type Coercion that such an assignment would fail to
generate a "Type Mismatch" error. Survivors in the crowd know better than to trust
default behaviors.

> As for automatic conversions, I've heard much the same line about automatic
> transmissions in cars...

I was listening to Car Talk on NPR a few weeks ago, and some poor slob called in
with a sob story that's perhaps appropos. Seems he'd bought a "4-speed" car (forget
what make/model) a few years ago, and had driven it happily all this time. Well, lo
and behold, turns out now that it's actually a 5-speed tranny, and the last owner
had apparently swapped gear knobs (to one that only diagrammed 4 gears, rather than
all 5) at some point. Oh how silly this guy felt. Shoulda heard the Tappet
brothers laugh. Hell, I even felt sorry for the guy.

Signature

.NET: It's About Trust!
http://vfred.mvps.org

Reply to this Message

macropod - 29 Mar 2007 23:16 GMT

Hi Karl,

It wasn't meant to be belittling, but I can't see how using the automatic type conversion tools built into vba in any riskier than
doing it manually - regardless of what happened with an app (vb3) that was superseded over a decade ago.

If there is a material risk doing this in vba, please say what it is. AFAIK, all vba implementations support it.

Regards

Signature

macropod
[MVP - Microsoft Word]
-------------------------

>> True, a purist might use something like:
>
[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
> diagrammed 4 gears, rather than all 5) at some point. Oh how silly this guy felt. Shoulda heard the Tappet brothers laugh.
> Hell, I even felt sorry for the guy.

Reply to this Message

Karl E. Peterson - 29 Mar 2007 23:26 GMT

> It wasn't meant to be belittling, but I can't see how using the automatic type
> conversion tools built into vba in any riskier than doing it manually -
> regardless of what happened with an app (vb3) that was superseded over a decade
> ago.
> If there is a material risk doing this in vba, please say what it is. AFAIK, all
> vba implementations support it.

As we found in the VB3/VB4 transition days, the real risk was in trusting default
behaviors to remain consistent through time. As things stand, ClassicVB is now
probably *the* most stable language on the planet, eh? <g> But that doesn't mean
VBA isn't subject to some "cleaning up" in the future. The bottom line is, if you
don't depend on default behaviors (automatic coercions, default properties, and so
on), your code can't change behavior in future versions just because some young pup
at MSFT (probably sitting on a copy of Code Complete, so he can reach the keyboard)
decides that VBA could be cooler if only [fill-in-the-blank]. Is it a material
risk? Considering the history (see my sig), it's only immaterial if you consider
your code to be disposable.

Signature

.NET: It's About Trust!
http://vfred.mvps.org

Reply to this Message