The end of VBA?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Erv Young
  • Start date Start date
E

Erv Young

I read somewhere, very recently, that MS is phasing out VBA in favor
of ... what? VB.NET? Visual Studio .NET? The article I read seemed
to imply that all existing code (i.e., your entire life's work) was in
jeopardy. Hmmm.... All breathe deeply now....

Can anybody clarify this rumor, and confirm or deny? And if there is
a looming Next Big Thing, what is new about it besides the name?

Thanks.

--Erv
 
Microsoft moved from VB to VB.NET as a development language. While there
is commonality, there are also differences. It would be logical to believe
that eventually, VBA would be replaced by the .NET. However, the change is
not iminent and, to the best of my knowledge there are no announced plans to
change. They have introduced a set of tools to facilitate the interface of
Office Apps to VB.Net, Visual Studio.Net based applications. However, I
think for at least the next version or two of Office, VBA will remain.
Also, companies that have invested in VBA applications are not going to
suddenly drop all their investment to convert just so they can upgrade to a
new version of office.

http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2003/oct03/10-13VSTOOfficeLaunchPR.asp

http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/office/
 
MSFT is planning on removing VB completely (in the long run, not
immediately), and replace it with the more robust and faster C#. Though
since it will all be in .Net, I presume it won't be difficult to use
C,C++,Python,Perl, etc, etc, etc.

-akshay
 
Visual Basic.net and C# are saif to be the two best integrated languages in
Visual Studio.net . Both languages create identical compiled files, and
there is no difference in performance for "similar programming" between the
two. VB6 is already removed from the market, but still widely used by
countless people, VB.net is very much alive and I believe it stays that way.
 
Harald Staff said:
Visual Basic.net and C# are saif to be the two best integrated languages in
Visual Studio.net . Both languages create identical compiled files, and
there is no difference in performance for "similar programming" between the
two. VB6 is already removed from the market, but still widely used by
countless people, VB.net is very much alive and I believe it stays that
Click to expand...
way.

Actually, I'll have to disagree with you here. Though they "should" produce
the same MSIL, they don't. They are very similar in terms of performaces,
but I belive that in very certain cases, C# has an edge, and the whole
unsafe thing is pretty good when you have to Interop with COM, it can make
things a lot easier.

-akshay
 
Tom said:
Also, companies that have invested in VBA applications are not going to
suddenly drop all their investment to convert just so they can upgrade to a
new version of office.
Click to expand...

Thats pretty much what MS expected with VB developers and companies
that utilized VB,they had the expection that they would gleefully
convert all their personal apps and developers over to Net.From what
I've seen Net is not being welcomed quite so warmly by the later.
 
Harald Staff said:
Visual Basic.net and C# are saif to be the two best integrated languages in
Visual Studio.net . Both languages create identical compiled files, and
there is no difference in performance for "similar programming" between the
two. VB6 is already removed from the market, but still widely used by
countless people, VB.net is very much alive and I believe it stays that way.
Click to expand...

Indeed the environment allows you to
mix VB.Net and C# modules in the same solution
and compile run and most importantly debug them
together.

This is very useful when developing a Client Server
appn where the serve is in C# and the Client is VB

Keith
 
That's not necessarily true. Microsoft has said all along that developers
should convert only those applications for which conversion makes sense (to
add new functionality or to take advantage of new capabilities, for
example). Existing applications should be left alone -- VB 6 (for example)
is not going to "suddenly" stop working any time in the foreseeable future.
Microsoft has never said that ALL existing applications must be
re-engineered and re-written in .NET; that was a knee-jerk reaction by those
who already had an axe to grind with Microsoft. Microsoft does, however,
expect pretty much all NEW development to be done in .NET.

And, the reception that .NET is receiving depends greatly on the developers
that you talk to. Some are very happy about it, some are very upset. I think
Microsoft expected this all along, and is willing to write off a certain
percentage of VB (and VBA, to get back on topic) developers in this paradigm
shift. Not pretty, but that's the way it is.

In some ways, it's no different that what Microsoft really needs to do with
Windows (but is reluctant to) -- make a complete break with the past and
re-write the Windows platform from the ground up. That would have the
benefit of fixing a lot of the problems that have arisen over the years
(what with all the bolting-on of additional functionality and extending of
Windows into areas that it was not originally designed for), but would have
the drawback of breaking many existing applications. Some people are calling
for Microsoft to make the break, and some would be greatly upset if/when
Microsoft does. I believe that the up-coming Longhorn fits this bill. What
do you think the hue-and-cry would be if a Windows "upgrade" came out that
broke many applications, even if ALL security and bug problems were fixed in
the process? And yet, it will have to be done at some point or Windows will
eventually collapse under its own weight.

Microsoft saw the same necessity for its development platform. Hence,
VB.NET -- a "break" with the past that attempts to keep at least some
compatibility, to ease the transition.

Carl Rapson
 
Back
Top