http://msmvps.com/blogs/bill/archive/2008/04/08/implied-interfaces.aspxOne of the many things I love about VB is it&#39;s explicit interface mapping . It&#39;s the beauty of declarative coding that not only allows for flexible mapping but also makes the code explicit. You don&#39;t need to know the intimate details of aenCommunityServer 2008.5 SP2 (Build: 40407.4157)http://msmvps.com/blogs/bill/archive/2008/04/08/implied-interfaces.aspx#1578801Wed, 09 Apr 2008 03:01:41 GMTd67277c4-116b-43f1-b688-e9ef184ea916:1578801bill<p>hey Paul,</p> <p>That you are equally screwed today is not a forward looking implementation, it's an arguement for status quo of something that doesn't work ! ;)</p> <p>See this entry as to implied itnerfaces and members in the base class:</p> <p><a rel="nofollow" target="_new" href="http://msmvps.com/blogs/bill/archive/2008/04/09/more-on-implied-interfaces.aspx">msmvps.com/.../more-on-implied-interfaces.aspx</a> </p> <div style="clear:both;"></div><img src="http://msmvps.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=1578801" width="1" height="1">http://msmvps.com/blogs/bill/archive/2008/04/08/implied-interfaces.aspx#1578327Tue, 08 Apr 2008 18:04:01 GMTd67277c4-116b-43f1-b688-e9ef184ea916:1578327Paul Vick<p>See my comments on my blog post, but I&#39;m also not sure how this would make things any worse for refactoring--as it stands today, if you refactor a method that implements an interface into a base class, you&#39;re equally screwed. I do agree that if we did something like what I propose, we would need to provide some sort of visual cue that the implicit implementation had occured and to what...</p> <div style="clear:both;"></div><img src="http://msmvps.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=1578327" width="1" height="1">