What's the point of C# and C++

[Rory Becker]

Hello Michael,

C# does not show errors until you do a build. This
makes C# run faster in the IDE and is a fact.

And this has been deemed of such little relevance that VS2008 now has a background
compiler for C#

 

[Michael C]

Hello Michael,


And this has been deemed of such little relevance that VS2008 now has a
background compiler for C#

I don't know about that but the fact remains that the C# IDE is faster. VB
stuggles quite a bit on my celeron 2.6 at work.

Michael

 

[Rory Becker]

Hello Michael,

I don't know about that but the fact remains that the C# IDE is
faster. VB stuggles quite a bit on my celeron 2.6 at work.

I have no such issues ... I suggest that this is the case for the majority
of people.

The original question regarded the point in the various languages.
I can agree with (I think) only 1 statement in your original passage....

The reason both exist is that they are aimed at different markets.

This is clearly true although, not for the reasons you suggest.

Some people find it easier to read and write VB style code and some people
find it easier to read and write C-Style Code. It's that simple... Just
as some people are more comfortable with a Latin derived languageset and
others are more comfortable with (just for example) an arabic or chinese
character set.

(My appologies if the specifics of my example are offensive to anyone or
if what I view as latin derived, in fact came from elsewhere. The intent
behind my point is still the same)

To the OP:

It comes down to preference. I would argue that those occasions where you
find one language truely lacking in some way compared to the other are less
that 1/2 of a percent.

Language choice should be varied but has nothing to do with how casual a
programmer you are..

You cannot derive programmer compenency or commitment from language choice.
You might just as well decide on the basis of a small sample, that all C#
programmers are close minded morons

*This is clearly not the case*

If confronted with the poor marketing on the page referenced... Microsoft
would spot their blunder and correct it.

 

[Michael C]

I have no such issues ... I suggest that this is the case for the majority
of people.

You must have a faster machine I guess. I think a lot of home users have
faster PCs than corporate PCs, this has certainly pretty always been the
case me throughout my working life. I don't really know what else to say, VB
most certainly stuggles on my work PC while C# runs quite well. It's fairly
well know throughout the community that VB is slower because it updates the
error list in real time. I find just typing can be quite sluggish because of
this.

The original question regarded the point in the various languages.
I can agree with (I think) only 1 statement in your original passage....

I don't really expect you to agree that VB is more aimed at casual
programmers but they have taken out advanced features (like pointers and
anonymous methods) and kept all the more begineer features (like option
strict, form instance variables and calling static methods from instance
variables). I really don't want to start a storm in a tea cup but I think
you must be in denial. I mean, for what reason would they add form instance
variables except to target begineers? And for what other reasons would they
not have the advanced features?

You cannot derive programmer compenency or commitment from language
choice. You might just as well decide on the basis of a small sample, that
all C# programmers are close minded morons

And I might conclude that all VB programmers are childish and illogical but
that is clearly not the case.

Michael

 

[Cor Ligthert[MVP]]

Rory,

Some people find it easier to read and write VB style code and some people
find it easier to read and write C-Style Code. It's that simple... Just
as some people are more comfortable with a Latin derived languageset and
others are more comfortable with (just for example) an arabic or chinese
character set.

(My appologies if the specifics of my example are offensive to anyone or
if what I view as latin derived, in fact came from elsewhere. The intent
behind my point is still the same)

People who are speaking non Latin languaes can maybe see this as offensice.
I assume you are somebody who is natively speaking one of the Latin derived
languages as Spanisch, Italian, Rumish, Rumunian, Portugese or French.

However, maybe do I make a mistake and you simply forgot by instance people
who are speaking Germanic languages (in that catogory fits English) and
Slavic languages.



Cor

 

[Branco Medeiros]

Michael C wrote on an answer to Mark S. Milley:

I disagree with that statement. A better example would be a technical
document written using roman numerials vs decimal.

</snip>

Wow, look who's being childish now... You're pushing it too hard, it
seems. I can't believe you really think so low of the language that
you used for so many years (according to yourself) and probably earned
your living for a long time...

Anyway your comparison seems completely off and far from the truth,
even purposely offensive... How about this: "A better example would be
a technical document written using"... decimal numbers vs.
hexadecimal.

In other words, both are two very capable numbering systems, but the
first one is obviously easier to read than the second (which becomes
irrelevant when you become very good with hexadecimal numbers, but
that may take a while).

Regards,

Branco.

 

[Branco Medeiros]

Michael C wrote answering Armin Zingler:

BTW, I think you're misunderstanding the point of safe code. It's there so
that users can restrict an untrusted app from doing things they don't want
it to do. ie it's there for security. It doesn't magically make your app
less buggy, you can still write buggy safe or unsafe code.

Sorry to disagree, and correct me if I'm wrong, but the restriction on
unsafe code has *everything* to do with pointer errors, and thus,
unstable (even unsecure) apps. Maybe you didn't notice it in all your
years of programming (from inside the safety net provided by VB
classic -- <<sarcastic smile here>>), but most bugs and security
breaches used to come from bad use of pointers in C/C++.

Regards,

Branco.

 

[Rory Becker]

Hello Branco,

Anyway your comparison seems completely off and far from the truth,
even purposely offensive... How about this: "A better example would be
a technical document written using"... decimal numbers vs.
hexadecimal.

In other words, both are two very capable numbering systems, but the
first one is obviously easier to read than the second (which becomes
irrelevant when you become very good with hexadecimal numbers, but
that may take a while).

I like that..... Seems much more reasonable.

 

[Herfried K. Wagner [MVP]]

How do you get away with that? For example, every time you read from a
data reader you need to use DirectCast. I'm sure there are literally
hundreds of other examples where you need directcast also.

Casts can fail and thus they should not be necessary at all if possible.
Types should be checked at compile time to prevent such problems. BTW, I
have never used the data reader.

Take the introduction of generics as an example to reduce the number of
(problematic, because they cannot be checked by the compiler) runtime casts
('ArrayList' vs. 'List(Of T)').

 

[Michael C]

Casts can fail and thus they should not be necessary at all if possible.
Types should be checked at compile time to prevent such problems. BTW, I
have never used the data reader.

You simply can't avoid a cast when retrieving data from the database. At
some point you need to cast whether you are using generics, typed data sets
or a data reader. If someone changes a stored proc to return a varchar
instead of an int then you are going to (and should) get an error.

Take the introduction of generics as an example to reduce the number of
(problematic, because they cannot be checked by the compiler) runtime
casts ('ArrayList' vs. 'List(Of T)').

I understand you can reduce a lot of casts this way but there is still a lot
of need to use them when talking to a database.

Michael

 

[Michael C]

Wow, look who's being childish now... You're pushing it too hard, it
seems.

I'm just emulating what was said to me. Basically I was imating someone's
childishness to show them how childish they were being.

I can't believe you really think so low of the language that
you used for so many years (according to yourself) and probably earned
your living for a long time...

Who said I think lowly of it? I just think that C# is a better option and
that it is more aimed at the professional. I don't think that's the
criticism that many here think it is. I consider it more a statement of fact
in the same way I'd say squash is a less popular game than tennis, even
though I prefer squash.

Anyway your comparison seems completely off and far from the truth,
even purposely offensive... How about this: "A better example would be
a technical document written using"... decimal numbers vs.
hexadecimal.

In other words, both are two very capable numbering systems, but the
first one is obviously easier to read than the second (which becomes
irrelevant when you become very good with hexadecimal numbers, but
that may take a while).

Both languages are very capable and can do similar things and I don't
consider C# to be hugely better than VB. At the same time the difference is
not insignificant and C# is significantly better for full time programmers
imo. This isn't because it's VB, it's because of the stupid decisions that
Microsoft have made. Personally I think they intentionally stuffed up
intellisense.

Michael

 

[Michael C]

Sorry to disagree, and correct me if I'm wrong, but the restriction on
unsafe code has *everything* to do with pointer errors, and thus,
unstable (even unsecure) apps. Maybe you didn't notice it in all your
years of programming (from inside the safety net provided by VB
classic -- <<sarcastic smile here>>), but most bugs and security
breaches used to come from bad use of pointers in C/C++.

We've had the ability to write pointer free (hence supposedly buffer overrun
safe) code for years in VB6 and other high level languages. I think the idea
with .net was to give the user (or admin) the ability to decide whether safe
or unsafe code is run.

Michael

 

[Tom Shelton]

qqq qqq used his keyboard to write :

Seriosuly... You are replying to a thread that ended 2 years ago? Oh,
well

What about this?

VB:

Dim a(5) as Integer

C#:

int[] a = new int[5];

var a = new int[5];

It is clear declaring arrays in VB requires less coding! (Why write int
twice!).

you don't have to.

If you are sick writing keywords like Dim, then I am sick writing semicolon
after each line!

waaaah.

Anyway, I don't agree that such very small partial comparisons make the
difference between the languages. In general VB is easier without any doubt,
and you can build applications more quickly.

Nope, not any more... The only place that could be argued was really
C#3 and below - because of the easier early binding for com interop
scenarios in VB.NET. That gap is now closed in C#4 - with the
inclusion of optional params and the dynamic type. In fact, I would
say that the implementation is superior, since you can restict dynamic
to a single variable rather than have to turn it off for a whole
module.

Yet C# could have some superior
aspects over VB,
Yep.

but the advantages of C# over VB will not appear unless you
are building huge complex applications. Small to Medium applications of
moderate complexity are better performed by VB (Take less time and effort).

Nope.

However, If someone masters C#, he will find C# easier and more efficient.
And if someone masters VB, he will find VB easier and more efficient. What I
have talked about is for new programmers.

I have matered both - C# is easier and more efficient. Generally less
verbose, more power when needed, and uses the same dang framework as
vb. And in the rare case I need a vb function, I can just include a
reference to the vb runtime and call it.

 

[Cor]

Tom,

You message remind me on a big computer company from the past (the biggest
you know this absolute as well like me), it was always the same, in version
3 they told that what other companies had was not the right solution.

In their version 4 they came with exactly the same like that other company,
and yes they had learned from some not so well done small things from the
other companies and made that in another way.

Could not resist to share my smile with you.



Cor


"Tom Shelton" wrote in message
qqq qqq used his keyboard to write :

Seriosuly... You are replying to a thread that ended 2 years ago? Oh,
well

What about this?

VB:

Dim a(5) as Integer

C#:

int[] a = new int[5];

var a = new int[5];

It is clear declaring arrays in VB requires less coding! (Why write int
twice!).

you don't have to.

If you are sick writing keywords like Dim, then I am sick writing
semicolon after each line!

waaaah.

Anyway, I don't agree that such very small partial comparisons make the
difference between the languages. In general VB is easier without any
doubt, and you can build applications more quickly.

Nope, not any more... The only place that could be argued was really
C#3 and below - because of the easier early binding for com interop
scenarios in VB.NET. That gap is now closed in C#4 - with the
inclusion of optional params and the dynamic type. In fact, I would
say that the implementation is superior, since you can restict dynamic
to a single variable rather than have to turn it off for a whole
module.

Yet C# could have some superior aspects over VB,
Yep.

but the advantages of C# over VB will not appear unless you are building
huge complex applications. Small to Medium applications of moderate
complexity are better performed by VB (Take less time and effort).

Nope.

However, If someone masters C#, he will find C# easier and more efficient.
And if someone masters VB, he will find VB easier and more efficient. What
I have talked about is for new programmers.

I have matered both - C# is easier and more efficient. Generally less
verbose, more power when needed, and uses the same dang framework as
vb. And in the rare case I need a vb function, I can just include a
reference to the vb runtime and call it.