Russell Jones' Article


DevX Home    Today's Headlines   Articles Archive   Tip Bank   Forums   

Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Russell Jones' Article

  1. #1
    Russell Sinclair Guest

    Russell Jones' Article


    Russell,
    I couldn't agree with you more. And it's not just because we have the same
    first name.

    VB.NET looks like it is going to deliver some of the functionality that VB
    programmers have been crying for for years. Personally, I'm tired of spending
    days programming around the limitations in VB 6.0 that keep me from the power
    that C++ has. Inheritance is a huge step forward for VB and of course any
    major change in implementation like this requires major changes in the product.

    Admittedly, there are a number of changes that I'm not looking forward to
    having to learn how to work with. Some of the things you can do with VB 6
    are so easy, they don't require you to think what they mean to the computer
    itself. VB.NET requires you to put a bit more thought into how you develop
    your applications as much of the functionality has changed. However, I think
    this is a good thing.

    The one major concern I have with VB.NET, having just attended a marketing
    seminar for it, is that much of the general coding of an application is automated.
    I'm sure that every person in this newsgroup shudders when they hear the
    words "Microsoft" and "Wizard" in the same sentence. Microsoft's wizard-generated
    code has always been almost complete garbage. I can't remember the last time
    I used an MS wizard to generate code for me (it always takes longer to clean
    it up than it would to write it yourself). Hopefully MS will devote a bit
    more time to ensuring that the code that is generated is clean, accurate,
    and optimized. I'm not holding my breath.

    But I am looking forward to VB.NET. At least once the first service pack
    is released.

  2. #2
    Chuck Yocum Guest

    Re: Russell Jones' Article


    "Russell Sinclair" <russell@synthesystems.com> wrote:
    >
    >Russell,
    >I couldn't agree with you more. And it's not just because we have the same
    >first name.
    >
    >VB.NET looks like it is going to deliver some of the functionality that

    VB
    >programmers have been crying for for years. Personally, I'm tired of spending
    >days programming around the limitations in VB 6.0 that keep me from the

    power
    >that C++ has. Inheritance is a huge step forward for VB and of course any
    >major change in implementation like this requires major changes in the product.
    >
    >Admittedly, there are a number of changes that I'm not looking forward to
    >having to learn how to work with. Some of the things you can do with VB

    6
    >are so easy, they don't require you to think what they mean to the computer
    >itself. VB.NET requires you to put a bit more thought into how you develop
    >your applications as much of the functionality has changed. However, I think
    >this is a good thing.
    >
    >The one major concern I have with VB.NET, having just attended a marketing
    >seminar for it, is that much of the general coding of an application is

    automated.
    >I'm sure that every person in this newsgroup shudders when they hear the
    >words "Microsoft" and "Wizard" in the same sentence. Microsoft's wizard-generated
    >code has always been almost complete garbage. I can't remember the last

    time
    >I used an MS wizard to generate code for me (it always takes longer to clean
    >it up than it would to write it yourself). Hopefully MS will devote a bit
    >more time to ensuring that the code that is generated is clean, accurate,
    >and optimized. I'm not holding my breath.
    >
    >But I am looking forward to VB.NET. At least once the first service pack
    >is released.


    Well Said Russell.

    Chuck Yocum


  3. #3
    Phil Weber Guest

    Re: Russell Jones' Article

    > Well said, Russell.

    Chuck: We generally ask that if you reply to a lengthy post and add only a
    few lines, please do not quote the entire post to which you're replying. For
    more information on DevX newsgroup etiquette, please see
    http://news.devx.com/newspolicy.asp . Thanks!
    ---
    Phil Weber
    DevX Newsgroup Admin



  4. #4
    RS Guest

    Re: Russell Jones' Article


    I couldnt have said it better. I guess this was long awaited. People who couldnt
    program saw the ease with which vb could be handled, and they jumped in the
    fray. Now, when the real flexibility is being exposed they obviously feel
    insecure....Anybody would. What makes me insecure is that this shouldnt become
    such a big issue that vb.net fails !!
    Keeping my fingers crossed ....

  5. #5
    Larry Linson Guest

    Re: Russell Jones' Article


    "Michael \(michka\) Kaplan" wrote:

    > Its amazing that everyone who says anything even remotely
    > negative about the direction of the product is somehow
    > insecure, or inadequate, or some other negatvie thing.


    It's nothing new, michka, the object-obsessed crowd has been avoiding responding
    to valid questions about their "religious beliefs" for a long time by insulting
    the questioner, dismissing them with condescending comments.

    I agree that OO can be useful in code-intensive environments; I don't agree
    that VB should be forced to be a code-intensive environment, nor that [millions
    | hundreds of thousands | whatever number you like] of procedural programmers
    who use VB need be dragged, kicking and screaming if need be, and forced
    to adopt an OOP view of the world.

    Many of us have clients or users whose needs are satisfied by standalone
    and straight client-server applications for modest user audiences (up to
    the hundreds or low thousands, but often just a handful in one office) that
    do not require the distributed, enterprise, server-centric approach that
    is quite obviously the main thrust of VS.NET. In fact, my clients appreciate
    that I can point-and-click my way to an interface that is friendly for their
    users and then, rapidly, sprinkle just enough code behind it for it to work
    smoothly and do only those functions which are necessary for their business
    solution. It is just these capabilities that, it appears to me, are adversely
    affected by VB.NET.

    Maybe I can satisfy all their needs with the one more release of Access that
    doesn't _seem_ to be .NETized; maybe, if they don't install any .NET stuff
    that breaks needed support, I can continue to support "Classic VB" for them.
    Maybe, though no one has yet succeeded, someone'll convince me that VB.NET
    isn't really an imposition that will cost my clients more for me (or anyone
    else) to develop the small applications they need.

    But then again, if I must "objectify" myself, why should I not move to one
    of the "truly object-oriented" languages? I spent the first 30-odd years
    of my computer career in code-intensive environments; I've worked on international-scope,
    enterprise applications (without a smidgen of OOP); I guess I can revert
    to code-intensive mode again, if need be.

  6. #6
    James D. Foxall Guest

    Re: Russell Jones' Article

    I'm not insecure, and I'm definitely NOT a hacker. I have much to gain from
    VB.Net being successful as far as book/article writing and speaking.
    However, I have legitimate concerns as an experienced developer with over
    5,000 users running my VB6 application.

    I'm also not an old fart that doesn't want to learn something new (I don't
    feel old at 31 at least).

    You can't dismiss the concerns of everyone as misguided, uninformed, or
    cowardice. How many lines of VB code have you written? How many apps have
    you distributed? To how many users?

    Think about it. Many of us with concerns do actually know what we're talking
    about.

    --

    James D. Foxall
    Microsoft Certified Solution Developer

    "RS" <ramshri@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:3a703a21@news.devx.com...
    >
    > I couldnt have said it better. I guess this was long awaited. People who

    couldnt
    > program saw the ease with which vb could be handled, and they jumped in

    the
    > fray. Now, when the real flexibility is being exposed they obviously feel
    > insecure....Anybody would. What makes me insecure is that this shouldnt

    become
    > such a big issue that vb.net fails !!
    > Keeping my fingers crossed ....




Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
HTML5 Development Center
 
 
FAQ
Latest Articles
Java
.NET
XML
Database
Enterprise
Questions? Contact us.
C++
Web Development
Wireless
Latest Tips
Open Source


   Development Centers

   -- Android Development Center
   -- Cloud Development Project Center
   -- HTML5 Development Center
   -- Windows Mobile Development Center