VB 2002 and 2003 code incompatible?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gary Napolitano
  • Start date Start date
G

Gary Napolitano

I have VB .net (2002 personal ownership) at home, and .net 2003 at my
office (we're an MSDN developer shop) and I found that I cannot write
code home, bring it to work, and back home again. This is because 2003
"converts" the source code.

What I found it does is it changes some header files to version 8.0 and
nothing
more because I can "convert" it back by replacing the 8.0 label back to
7.0

If I use 2002 with the second "edition" of the framework, AND the code
was the same, what is the sense of forcing a Gestapo like upgrade to
every version that comes along?

Just in case the suggestion is made... I won't bring 2003 from work
to install at home as I'm certain that it violates the MSDN license,
and probably breaks a few dozen laws worldwide.

OK, so you have to throw away code from VB6 and re-learn .net, but this
upgrading .net every 10-15 months is going to get expensive.



Regards,

Gary
 
The 2 versions use different versions of the .NET Framework. Once a 2002
project has been upgraded to a 2003 project you can't go back.
 
There are some breaking code changes. By forcing the "gestapo-like" tactics,
Microsoft saves people from themselves (ie, trying to run code with breaking
changes in the older IDE and bombing).

With much of your code, you can simply change the XML and run it.

In general, most 1.0 code runs in 1.1 without any changes, which is good.

--
Gregory A. Beamer
MPV; MCP: +I, SE, SD, DBA

**********************************************************************
Think outside the box!
**********************************************************************
 
Ken, thanks a LOT.

I can understand MS wanting to "SAVE ME from myself" but as I said
if the code remains the same, I see no reason to force feed upgrades
every time MS needs a boost in their revenue stream.

If they can "re-engineer" an O/S and development tools there HAS to be
a way to make writing code with their new tools less of a pain in the arse.




Regards,

Gary
 
Just in case the suggestion is made... I won't bring 2003 from work
to install at home as I'm certain that it violates the MSDN license,
and probably breaks a few dozen laws worldwide.
Click to expand...

Actually, if you read the EULA.Txt, you can make a copy and run it at
home as long as you are the only person that runs it. AFAIK, VB has
always allowed this. Here is section 1.1 from the EULA:

1.1 General License Grant. Microsoft grants to you as an individual, a
personal, nonexclusive license to use the Software, and to make and use
copies
of the Software for the purposes of designing, developing, testing, and
demonstrating your software product(s), provided that you are the only
individual using the Software.
If you are an entity, Microsoft grants to you a personal, nonexclusive
license
to use the Software, and to make and use copies of the Software, provided
that
for each individual using the Software within your organization, you have
acquired a separate and valid license for each such individual.

If I am wrong, someone please correct me.

Chris
 
You can get the 2003 upgrade disks for only $29 from Microsoft. May as well
do it, have a copy at home.

It's irritating, if you look at the version number of vs 2003, it's only
7.1, not 8, really only a minor upgrade (or bug fix collection, the new
features are minor and they haven't fixed major annoyances like combobox not
allowing form keypreview).

Bob
 
Herfried,
It's irritating, if you look at the version number of vs 2003, it's only
7.1, not 8, really only a minor upgrade (or bug fix collection, the new
features are minor and they haven't fixed major annoyances like combobox not
allowing form keypreview).

Cor
 
Hello,

Cor said:
It's irritating, if you look at the version number of vs 2003, it's only
7.1, not 8, really only a minor upgrade (or bug fix collection, the new
features are minor and they haven't fixed major annoyances like
combobox not allowing form keypreview).
Click to expand...

The .NET framework is version 1.1 too, not version 2.0.
 
Hi Herfried,
It's irritating, if you look at the version number of vs 2003, it's only
7.1, not 8, really only a minor upgrade (or bug fix collection, the new
features are minor and they haven't fixed major annoyances like combobox not
allowing form keypreview).
Click to expand...

Did you think I was writing that, that was Bob and I was asking if : Do you
tell that by expirience or from the papers?

How can you think I would write that after all the goods I have told about
VB 2003
:-(((((((((((((((((
Cor
 
I'm not sure if sarcasm is intended, but I mention the problem with combo
boxes from much experience, as I use a lot of them in my apps, and have to
write much longer code for lack of keypreview functionality if the focus is
on a combo box. It's a known issue with combo boxes with the normal drop
down style. Please correct me if you know otherwise.

Bob
 
Bob,
Reading it over yes the Combobox is for me to terrible, it was with 2002 and
one of the first things that I did overlook in 2003 was if it was fixed and
as I remember it was not. I had such a same problem with binding from
textboxes and stopped that. That too I don't know if that works now beter.
But a lot of things are better.

But the combobox is so overloaded with members.

Cor
 
Back
Top