Ahhh, the Microsoft approach. Its a good method because then bugfixes become enhancements

The designers of C# have irritated me in a number of ways: 1. I don't like the fact that they eliminated drop-through on case statements. It is irritating to have to code work-arounds for situations where one or more case statements can execute the same code. 2. The fact that they did not provide the ability to create static libraries that could be included at compile time and thus eliminate the need for having to ship umpteen dlls with your code. 3. This is more about .NET rather than C#, but I think it applies: With every version of .NET they take something away. In .Net V4 they removed the ability to catch memory exceptions...!!!##@^! 4. This is more about .NET rather than C#, but I think it applies: LINQ is not part of the framework! It is a binary lump that you can't step through in the debugger. Stop pretending it is part of the framework and part of C#

This is a bit silly, really. You are equating your ability to draw a triangle with the validity of a Euclidean geometric rule! In Euclidean geometry the sum of the angles of a triangle MUST add up to 180 degrees. However, you can have other geometries where this is not true. For example, Lobachevsky created a geometry in which Euclid's 5th postulate (that for any given line and a point not on that line, there is one parallel line through the point not intersecting the line) was false, that is, there is more than one line that can be extended through any given point parallel to another line of which that point is not part. One of the consequences of this is that the sum of the angles of a triangle must be LESS than 180 degrees. This geometry was an idle curiosity for over 100 years until it was found to be useful in relativistic physics.