Is VB Caca??

  • Thread starter Thread starter Don
  • Start date Start date
D

Don

I realize that this may sound like a troll but it is not intended to
be.

I haven't been reading this group but I've seen a number of
vociferious postings lately saying that "vb dotnet doesn't work".

Is that a widely held belief or is it just the same complaning that
goes on with all development tools??

Thanks,

Don
Bothell, WA
 
I'm not sure I would say that there are a number of postings indicating
VB.NET doesn't work in the first place.

Of course it works. Not to mention that VB.NET isn't a development tool,
it's a programming language. Visual Studio .NET is a development tool.
 
Don said:
I realize that this may sound like a troll but it is not intended to
be.

I haven't been reading this group but I've seen a number of
vociferious postings lately saying that "vb dotnet doesn't work".

Is that a widely held belief or is it just the same complaning that
goes on with all development tools??

Thanks,

Don
Bothell, WA
Click to expand...

It's mostly just the ordinary complaints from people who don't really
understand what they are complaining about.

VB.NET does work, and pretty well too. Personally I don't care much for
the VB language, but I must still say that VB.NET is a huge leap forward
from VB 6. VB.NET is a truly object oriented language, which is a big
difference from the hardly more than pathetic support for object
orientation in VB 6.

VB.NET still suffers a bit from the BASIC syntax, and also some
sacrifices has been made to keep the syntax more like VB 6, but nothing
so serious as to say that it doesn't work.
 
It's mostly just the ordinary complaints from people who don't really
understand what they are complaining about.

VB.NET does work, and pretty well too. Personally I don't care much for
the VB language, but I must still say that VB.NET is a huge leap forward
from VB 6. VB.NET is a truly object oriented language, which is a big
difference from the hardly more than pathetic support for object
orientation in VB 6.

VB.NET still suffers a bit from the BASIC syntax, and also some
sacrifices has been made to keep the syntax more like VB 6, but nothing
so serious as to say that it doesn't work.
Click to expand...

It's probably worth noting that a key difference between VB6 and
VB.NET is this:

VB6 is object-BASED. It supports objects, but is not truly object-
oriented.

VB.NET is a full-fledged object-oriented language, supporting all of
the standard OOP principles, though many of the commonly accepted
terms have different names (Shared in lieu of static, for instance).

Further, all VB.NET code compiles down to IL, just as C# code does. It
also references the full body of the .NET Framework, just as C# does.
So, as others have pointed out, the difference between VB.NET and
other .NET languages is simply a matter of syntax and user preference.

(Having said that, there are also minor differences in how efficient
the IL is that is generated for certain keywords and operators, but
those differences are minor in the extreme, and rarely become the
deciding factor in language selection.)

Mike
 
Göran Andersson said:
It's mostly just the ordinary complaints from people who don't really
understand what they are complaining about.

VB.NET does work, and pretty well too. Personally I don't care much for
the VB language, but I must still say that VB.NET is a huge leap forward
from VB 6. VB.NET is a truly object oriented language, which is a big
difference from the hardly more than pathetic support for object
orientation in VB 6.

VB.NET still suffers a bit from the BASIC syntax, and also some
sacrifices has been made to keep the syntax more like VB 6, but nothing
so serious as to say that it doesn't work.
Click to expand...

Why do you hang out here if you don't like VB?

Just wondering,
Robin S.
 
Don said:
I realize that this may sound like a troll but it is not intended to
be.

I haven't been reading this group but I've seen a number of
vociferious postings lately saying that "vb dotnet doesn't work".

Is that a widely held belief or is it just the same complaning that
goes on with all development tools??

Thanks,

Don
Bothell, WA
Click to expand...

It's not a widely held belief. Any post you see by aaronkempf, susiedba,
dbahooker, larrylinson, or todos menos are all aaronkempf. He often posts
responses to himself, just to get the threads going. He thinks that by
posting abusive language and complaints, he can get Microsoft to revert to
VB6.

Robin S.
 
Don,

I almost never used VB6 and I have hated Basic.

VBNet is not to compare with any of those. It is a new language, which is
able to use most good things from the latter program languages.

However it skipped the legacy problems from C and VB style languages.

Samples

You are able to declare inside a very deep scope without assigning
Your code is checked in a very deep way while typing.

Both I miss very much in C#

Just my opinion.

Cor
 
RobinS said:
Why do you hang out here if you don't like VB?
Click to expand...

Hi Robin: I realize your question was directed to Göran but I thought I'd
take a stab at it since you seem like a reasonable person. Notwithstanding
your attempts in microsoft.public.dotnet.general to get people to stop
posting questions about why their modem won't dial and such :-)

Let me start with an example. Somebody asks "what do you think of Los
Angeles" and someone replies "the smog is pretty bad". The reply to that
guy shouldn't be "if you hate it so much why do you live in the United
States?" Why? Because LA is in fact smoggy. There are valid reasons for
living there anyway but that doesn't change the fact that it has a smog
problem.

VB syntax is quirky in a number of ways due to it's roots. They may not
seem quirky to a person who has only developed in VB but they are if you
step back and compare it to other languages in an unbiased manner. That
isn't easy, people have preferences and they tend to be passionate about
them. So (again as an example) no matter how stupid the design of .MEM
files was in dBASE II and dBASE III, people who used them called everybody
who pointed that out "a mindless idiot." Is the Python language's indent
sensitivity a good thing or a bad thing?

You've no doubt read a few of the threads here where the topic is LEN() or
UCASE(). If a person (let's say me) suggests the syntax is dated (and goes
out on a limb and suggests it was only retained to placate the VB6 folk)
that doesn't translate into "VB.Net is stupid". It could even be
interpreted as "you'd get more respect (if C# is considered as a language
that gets more respect) if the things that made it seem like a "toy
language" (those aren't my words) were eliminated."

Everything in life doesn't have to come down to a language war. One can
like Java fundamentally yet program in VB.Net for economic reasons and
should be able to point out "that's odd" without being asked to leave a
public newsgroup. The alternative to rational discussion is embodied in
"the cult of VB6 developer" where everybody must chant the same thing or be
branded a heretic. People have attempted to pull that nonsense here but I
believe the days of yelling "he's a witch" and having that work have
(thankfully) passed.

If I talk to a SmallTalk developer (and I have) and they proclaim there is
no better language on the face of the planet I tend to doubt them. Perhaps
there isn't for the type of software they write but by definition this can't
be the universal case. If there was no language betterin every case there
would be no other languages.

Tom
 
RobinS said:
Why do you hang out here if you don't like VB?

Just wondering,
Robin S.
Click to expand...

Just because I prefer C# myself, doesn't mean that I think less off
people only based on what language they use.

Most questions are about programming in general and methods in the
framework anyway, and that is the same regardless of the language used.
 
Cor said:
You are able to declare inside a very deep scope without assigning
Your code is checked in a very deep way while typing.

Both I miss very much in C#

Just my opinion.

Cor
Click to expand...

I don't see how VB.NET is any different from C# in either of those aspects.
 
Göran Andersson said:
I don't see how VB.NET is any different from C# in either of those
aspects.
Click to expand...

I assume Cor refers to VB's background compilation with the latter point, a
feature that is not present in C# currently.
 
Herfried said:
I assume Cor refers to VB's background compilation with the latter
point, a feature that is not present in C# currently.
Click to expand...

But it is.
 
Goran

beside what Herfried wrote

A a very simple one, however is in my idea good maintanable
\\\
Dim x As Integer
While x < 10
x += 1
End While
///

\\\
int x;
while (x < 10)
{
x += 1;
}
///
As sample does not go,while it is very handy.

(Or maybe is there a setting I don't know)

Cor
 
But it is.

No, it's not. In VB.NET, as soon as you move your cursor off the current
line, the dynamic compilation feature of the language/VS.NET will check the
code on that line for syntax and compile errors and you will get the
infamous "blue wavy underline" right away.

In C#, you must build your code to get the same syntax checking. C# is not
dynamically compiled like VB.NET is.

It's too bad, because it's really the main reason I haven't move to more
development in C# yet.
 
Wow!!

Tom Leylan said:
Hi Robin: I realize your question was directed to Göran but I thought I'd
take a stab at it since you seem like a reasonable person.
Notwithstanding your attempts in microsoft.public.dotnet.general to get
people to stop posting questions about why their modem won't dial and such
:-)

Let me start with an example. Somebody asks "what do you think of Los
Angeles" and someone replies "the smog is pretty bad". The reply to that
guy shouldn't be "if you hate it so much why do you live in the United
States?" Why? Because LA is in fact smoggy. There are valid reasons for
living there anyway but that doesn't change the fact that it has a smog
problem.

VB syntax is quirky in a number of ways due to it's roots. They may not
seem quirky to a person who has only developed in VB but they are if you
step back and compare it to other languages in an unbiased manner. That
isn't easy, people have preferences and they tend to be passionate about
them. So (again as an example) no matter how stupid the design of .MEM
files was in dBASE II and dBASE III, people who used them called everybody
who pointed that out "a mindless idiot." Is the Python language's indent
sensitivity a good thing or a bad thing?

You've no doubt read a few of the threads here where the topic is LEN() or
UCASE(). If a person (let's say me) suggests the syntax is dated (and
goes out on a limb and suggests it was only retained to placate the VB6
folk) that doesn't translate into "VB.Net is stupid". It could even be
interpreted as "you'd get more respect (if C# is considered as a language
that gets more respect) if the things that made it seem like a "toy
language" (those aren't my words) were eliminated."

Everything in life doesn't have to come down to a language war. One can
like Java fundamentally yet program in VB.Net for economic reasons and
should be able to point out "that's odd" without being asked to leave a
public newsgroup. The alternative to rational discussion is embodied in
"the cult of VB6 developer" where everybody must chant the same thing or
be branded a heretic. People have attempted to pull that nonsense here
but I believe the days of yelling "he's a witch" and having that work have
(thankfully) passed.

If I talk to a SmallTalk developer (and I have) and they proclaim there is
no better language on the face of the planet I tend to doubt them.
Perhaps there isn't for the type of software they write but by definition
this can't be the universal case. If there was no language betterin every
case there would be no other languages.

Tom
Click to expand...
 
Goran

beside what Herfried wrote

A a very simple one, however is in my idea good maintanable
\\\
Dim x As Integer
While x < 10
x += 1
End While
///

\\\
int x;
while (x < 10)
{
x += 1;}

///
As sample does not go,while it is very handy.

(Or maybe is there a setting I don't know)

Cor
Click to expand...

Your C# code would not compile. You would get a use of uninitialized
local variable error :) In C#, it is required that you initialize a
local variable before it's first use (C# only guarentees default
initialization for class level variables). The above would be best
expressed in C#:

int x = 0;
while (x < 10)
{
x++;
}

of course, you could do away with the {} in this case, and even do it
on one line:

while (x < 10) x++;
 
Tom,

It does not compare, I checked it although I know it would not, but as you
know you never use it in C#.

My point is that I like the way it is done in VB.Net and in my eyes. VB.Net
is the start of a new generation of programming languages. While C# is the
end of the C generartion. As forever people need time to get use to it, but
I have the believe that it will be like that as soon as the shorter develop
time becomes also vissible at management level. (And again I don't see it as
a successor from VB6, it adopted only some good things from that although it
took much more from C++)

The code I made for C# which is exactly the same in VB.Net, will not compile
in C#, while I don't understand why and can only see legancy
impossibilities.

We will probably see a lot of message which will show that the C# method is
better, but the same kind of message I have already read a while ago about
the puchcard which was better than the hard disk because it was by instance
better transportable.

:-)

Cor
 
compare has to be compile

Tom,

It does not compare, I checked it although I know it would not, but as you
know you never use it in C#.

My point is that I like the way it is done in VB.Net and in my eyes.
VB.Net is the start of a new generation of programming languages. While C#
is the end of the C generartion. As forever people need time to get use to
it, but I have the believe that it will be like that as soon as the
shorter develop time becomes also vissible at management level. (And again
I don't see it as a successor from VB6, it adopted only some good things
from that although it took much more from C++)

The code I made for C# which is exactly the same in VB.Net, will not
compile in C#, while I don't understand why and can only see legancy
impossibilities.

We will probably see a lot of message which will show that the C# method
is better, but the same kind of message I have already read a while ago
about the puchcard which was better than the hard disk because it was by
instance better transportable.

:-)

Cor
Click to expand...
 
Back
Top