Re: Will VB hurt .NET? Instead of .NET helping VB? - Page 3


DevX Home    Today's Headlines   Articles Archive   Tip Bank   Forums   

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 56

Thread: Re: Will VB hurt .NET? Instead of .NET helping VB?

  1. #31
    Jonathan Allen Guest

    Re: Will VB hurt .NET? Instead of .NET helping VB?

    > First we can discount the genius stuff - it took the kid *3 years* after
    > all.
    > Second, if it took the kid *3 years*, then it's hardly a good ad for the
    > tools.


    The SQL Server implementation only took a few months, working mainly on
    weekends. 3 years was the total time it took to go through the learning
    curve. There were many projects along the way before the entire thing was
    rolled into one.

    > Third, the Unix experts weren't.


    You missed the point. If an inexperienced kid could more or less master MS
    tools in 3 years, and a bunch of people who calling themselves experts and
    charging up to 200/hour couldn't get their project working, there has to be
    a significant difference in difficulty level. Even if they weren't experts,
    they had plenty of time to learn.

    --
    Jonathan Allen


    "Andy Chevin" <yoshimura.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
    news:3a761167$1@news.devx.com...
    > > If some kid who barely knows VB can build a fully functional enterprise
    > > system in 3 years, while a dozen Unix experts can't keep a

    less-functional
    > > system running, there is only two possible conclusions. Either that kid

    > was
    > > a genius, or MS has done a **** good job with their tools so far.

    >
    > Only two conclusions?
    >
    > First we can discount the genius stuff - it took the kid *3 years* after
    > all.
    > Second, if it took the kid *3 years*, then it's hardly a good ad for the
    > tools.
    > Third, the Unix experts weren't.
    > Fourth, they were laughing so hard at the amount of time it was taking the
    > kid to
    > get his system off the ground, they didn't have time to maintain their
    > system.
    >
    > Andy.
    >
    > Oh yeah - there should be a coupla <g>s in there - I think.
    >
    >
    >
    >




  2. #32
    Alessandro Coppo Guest

    Re: Will VB hurt .NET? Instead of .NET helping VB?


    Jonathan Allen wrote in message <3a762072@news.devx.com>...
    >You seem to not understand the term "scales".



    I understand the term "scales"; as a demonstration, the tasks of becoming
    proficient with PostgreSQL and Oracle are already in my agenda.

    Alessandro Coppo
    a.coppo@iol.it






  3. #33
    James D. Foxall Guest

    Re: Will VB hurt .NET? Instead of .NET helping VB?

    I've done sessions on programming Class modules at conferences, and the
    turnout is always unexpedly high. These numbers don't surprise me at all...

    --

    James D. Foxall
    Microsoft Certified Solution Developer

    "Patrick Steele" <psteele@ipdsolution.com_> wrote in message
    news:MPG.14de107c209553cb989695@news.devx.com...
    > In article <3a735a6e@news.devx.com>, jkaczor@acoupleanerds.com says...
    > >
    > > "Mike Mitchell" <kylix_is@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    > > news:3a71fed0.47447172@news.devx.com...
    > > >
    > > > model in VB.NET. You know it yourself. Up to 60% of VB programmers
    > > > have never used a single class, for heck's sake, and you're expecting
    > > > 'em to suddenly get the message from Microsoft and become OOP zealots?

    > >
    > > Where did you get that figure?
    > >
    > > Not that I disagree. Then, if you lump in the crop of "ASP/VBScript"
    > > developers
    > > never "creating a class" (I would rather say that than "using a class),

    what
    > > does the
    > > figure now become?

    >
    > I remember reading in one of the VBPJ editorials (within the past 3
    > months) that either 40% or 60% (can't remember which -- Mike might be
    > correct at 60%) had never used the "class" capability introduced in VB4.
    > --
    > Patrick Steele
    > (psteele@ipdsolution.com)
    > Lead Software Architect




  4. #34
    Mike Mitchell Guest

    Re: Will VB hurt .NET? Instead of .NET helping VB?

    On Tue, 30 Jan 2001 01:23:26 -0000, "Andy Chevin"
    <yoshimura.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:

    >>
    >> Okay, so now convince me that OOP is better!
    >>
    >> MM

    >
    >What's the point? It would be absolutely no use at all to you!
    >


    Well, it's YOUR challenge, then, to prove to me otherwise!

    MM

  5. #35
    Jason Kaczor Guest

    Re: Will VB hurt .NET? Instead of .NET helping VB?


    kylix_is@hotmail.com (Mike Mitchell) wrote:
    ><yoshimura.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
    >>>
    >>> Okay, so now convince me that OOP is better!
    >>>
    >>> MM

    >>
    >>What's the point? It would be absolutely no use at all to you!
    >>

    >
    >Well, it's YOUR challenge, then, to prove to me otherwise!


    kylix_is@hotmail.com (Mike Mitchell) wrote:
    >>> Okay, so now convince me that OOP is better!

    >>

    >Well, it's YOUR challenge, then, to prove to me otherwise!


    Look at your own "email" address...

    If you think "OOP" is useless, why would you consider Kylix?

    Straight C for you. Maybe the Pascal supported by the GCC, it doesn't know
    objects.

    What, do you want us to re-iterate all of the case studies, links, etc.

    http://www.rational.com/
    http://www.spc.ca/
    http://www.spr.com/
    http://www.sei.cmu.edu/
    http://www.sdmagazine.com/
    http://www.toa.com/

    >MM


    Regards
    Jason Kaczor

  6. #36
    Gregor R. Peisker Guest

    Re: Will VB hurt .NET? Instead of .NET helping VB?

    Hi Alessandro,

    what you say is certainly familiar.

    However, I would not go so far and attribute this situation on the
    intellectual background of VB programmers. Why, OO is just not the kind of
    thing that ...

    Regards,
    Gregor


    > In my consulting (and previously as employee) life here in Italy I have
    > determined that less than 10% of VB users use a fair share of VB
    > capabilities (e.g. classes, interfaces etc.). All the others are VERY good
    > at cut and paste, creating horrendously bloated forms with everything

    locked
    > in and lots of global variables (no classes, no user controls, no

    multi-tier
    > architectures... ehm, better, no architecture at all!).
    >
    > I don't know what happens in other countries but surely here 90+% of VB
    > users have not the intellectual background (and even less the will to

    learn)
    > to grasp a furiosly OO environment like .NET.
    >
    > Alessandro Coppo
    > a.coppo@iol.it
    >
    > P.S.: I belong to the other 10%... ;-) and I feel NO regret for all the
    > people who did not understand in the last 10 years the OOP was to be
    > mastered.





  7. #37
    Ralph Freeze Guest

    Re: Will VB hurt .NET? Instead of .NET helping VB?


    Spoken like a true VB programmer! (read that as non programmer). Every VB
    programmer I've met whines when it comes to writing propper code.

    Everything uses Pares ??!!?? And that's supposed to be what? Better? There
    is a reason for using a paren versus square brackets. Ever stop to think
    why that is the case?

    VB is not a programmers language and that's how it will always be. I've got
    news for you dude. There will never be a VB.Net 2 versions from this. You'll
    be forced to move to C#. That's the inside word. "They" want to migrate all
    you non programmers to C# and make real programmers out of you. snicker snicker
    <g>.

    It's time you VBers wake up! The alarm has been sounding since the announcement
    of .NET

    NOT GET ?

  8. #38
    Zane Thomas Guest

    Re: Will VB hurt .NET? Instead of .NET helping VB?

    On 1 Feb 2001 23:02:55 -0800, "Ralph Freeze" <rfreeze@yahoo.com> wrote:

    >VB is not a programmers language and that's how it will always be.


    Go away silly troll.


    ---
    Ice Z - Straight Outta Redmond

  9. #39
    John Hilliar Guest

    Re: Will VB hurt .NET? Instead of .NET helping VB?


    zane@mabry.com (Zane Thomas) wrote:
    >On 1 Feb 2001 23:02:55 -0800, "Ralph Freeze" <rfreeze@yahoo.com> wrote:
    >
    >>VB is not a programmers language and that's how it will always be.

    >
    >Go away silly troll.
    >
    >
    >---
    >Ice Z - Straight Outta Redmond

    To VB or not to VB
    That is what JA VAnt to know
    do you C




  10. #40
    Jonathan Allen Guest

    Re: Will VB hurt .NET? Instead of .NET helping VB?

    > Everything uses Pares ??!!?? And that's supposed to be what? Better? There
    > is a reason for using a paren versus square brackets. Ever stop to think
    > why that is the case?
    >


    Oh really? So what is the reason for the distinction in C#?

    --
    Jonathan Allen


    "Ralph Freeze" <rfreeze@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:3a7a5b9f$1@news.devx.com...
    >
    > Spoken like a true VB programmer! (read that as non programmer). Every VB
    > programmer I've met whines when it comes to writing propper code.
    >
    > Everything uses Pares ??!!?? And that's supposed to be what? Better? There
    > is a reason for using a paren versus square brackets. Ever stop to think
    > why that is the case?
    >
    > VB is not a programmers language and that's how it will always be. I've

    got
    > news for you dude. There will never be a VB.Net 2 versions from this.

    You'll
    > be forced to move to C#. That's the inside word. "They" want to migrate

    all
    > you non programmers to C# and make real programmers out of you. snicker

    snicker
    > <g>.
    >
    > It's time you VBers wake up! The alarm has been sounding since the

    announcement
    > of .NET
    >
    > NOT GET ?




  11. #41
    Zane Thomas Guest

    Re: Will VB hurt .NET? Instead of .NET helping VB?

    On 2 Feb 2001 00:13:35 -0800, "John Hilliar" <jmh1@clicks.co.za> wrote:

    >To VB or not to VB
    >That is what JA VAnt to know
    >do you C


    Pretty sharp.

    LOL!!!


    ---
    Ice Z - Straight Outta Redmond

  12. #42
    Jonathan Allen Guest

    Re: Will VB hurt .NET? Instead of .NET helping VB?

    12. C# has additional inconsistencies because functions require parens.

    C#: if (stringVar.Trim().Length == 0)
    VB.Net: If stringVar.Trim.Length = 0 Then

    As you can see, C# needs an extra set of parens, even though the method has
    no arguments. This annoyance is more evident when it is harder to tell if
    something is a method or property.

    x = oCustomer.LastName.Length;
    y = oCustomer.FullName().Length;

    As you can see, this introduces a needless inconsistency between fields,
    properties, and functions.

    --
    Jonathan Allen


    "Jonathan Allen" <greywolfcs@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
    news:137_3a720704@news.devx.com...
    > Why VB.Net is easier than C#, short list.
    >
    > 1. We don't have to use strict casting.
    >
    > 2. We can use late binding without (manually) using reflection.
    >
    > 3. WithEvents makes wiring a lot easier.
    > When you use WithEvents, you are wiring your event handlers
    > declaratively. Right there on the sub is the list of what it handles.

    Quick,
    > clean, easy to read, and in one place.
    > When you use C#'s method, you are wiring your events sequentially
    > and manually. If you want to know what events a sub handles, you have to
    > search through the code. Also, it's easy to forget the AddHandler call or
    > put it in the wrong place. And of course the compiler can't warn you that
    > you screwed up.
    >
    > 4. Consistency.
    > Everything uses parens (). It C#, some things use parens and some

    things
    > use brackets []. You can waste a lot of time fixing code that uses one
    > instead of the other.
    >
    > 5. Control Structures
    > VB's Do/Loop is more flexible that C#'s While
    > Select Case is vastly more powerful than C#'s Switch
    > With, which not technically a control structure, is still nice
    >
    > 6. Intuitive keywords. VB's keywords are easier to learn.
    > ButAnd vs &
    > And vs &&
    > Shared vs Static
    > Overrideable vs Virtual
    >
    > 7. Intuitive syntax. Which is easer to teach to a newbie?
    > For i = 0 to 9 Step 2
    > Sum += A(i)
    > Next
    >
    > for(i = 0; i<10; i+=2){
    > Sum += A[i];
    > }
    >
    > 8. Less parens needed, especially for casting.
    >
    > VB: If A And B Then
    > C#: if (A &&B)
    >
    > VB: S = CType(myNode.Value, Customer).LastName
    > C#: S = ((Customer)(myNode.value)).LastName;
    >
    > 9. No reverse notation.
    >
    > VB: Dim X as New SQL.SQLDataCommand(sCommand)
    > C#: SQL.SQLDataCommand X = New SQL.SQLDataCommand(sCommand);
    >
    > C#'s reverse notation, besides being less clear, can result in extra
    > typing.
    >
    > 10. ByRef works like it should.
    >
    > Public Sub Switch (ByRef A, ByRef B)
    >
    > C#: Switch(A, B);
    > This won't work because you forget to specify ref. Of course the
    > compiler won't warn you.
    >
    > C#: Switch(ref A, ref B);
    > Correct version, maybe. (Was I suppose to use "ref" or "out" this
    > time?)
    >
    > 11. Variables are initialized automatically.
    >
    > If I write "Dim X as Integer", X starts at 0 and I can start using it.
    > In C#, X is undefined and can result in an error.
    >
    >
    > --
    > Jonathan Allen
    >
    >
    > "Zane Thomas" <zane@mabry.com> wrote in message
    > news:3ad4d93c.938145531@news.devx.com...
    > > On Fri, 26 Jan 2001 11:40:20 -0800, "Jonathan Allen"
    > > <greywolfcs@bigfoot.com> wrote:
    > >
    > > >When it comes right down to it VB.Net is still easier than C#

    > >
    > > Really? I don't ask as a way of disputing what you say, I haven't used
    > > vb.net very heavily so I'm seriously curious to know what it is about
    > > vb.net which makes it significantly easier.
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > > ---
    > > Ice Z - Straight Outta Redmond

    >
    >




  13. #43
    Joe \Nuke Me Xemu\ Foster Guest

    Re: Will VB hurt .NET? Instead of .NET helping VB?

    "Ralph Freeze" <rfreeze@yahoo.com> wrote in message <news:3a7a5b9f$1@news.devx.com>...

    > Spoken like a true VB programmer! (read that as non programmer). Every VB
    > programmer I've met whines when it comes to writing propper code.


    And just how is propper code written, oh great guru?

    --
    Joe Foster <mailto:jfoster@ricochet.net> Space Cooties! <http://www.xenu.net/>
    WARNING: I cannot be held responsible for the above They're coming to
    because my cats have apparently learned to type. take me away, ha ha!



  14. #44
    Jonathan Allen Guest

    Re: Will VB hurt .NET? Instead of .NET helping VB?

    He's just jealous. Everyone knows that Basic has a proud heritage that dates
    back much further that C, and yet it continues to evolve as the
    circumstances dictate. As long as Basic and it's sister language Fortran can
    be found on everything from calculators to super computers, the brace
    huggers will be depressed and angry. Poor masochistic freaks.

    --
    Jonathan Allen


    "Zane Thomas" <zane@mabry.com> wrote in message
    news:3b5767a9.1498894062@news.devx.com...
    > On 1 Feb 2001 23:02:55 -0800, "Ralph Freeze" <rfreeze@yahoo.com> wrote:
    >
    > >VB is not a programmers language and that's how it will always be.

    >
    > Go away silly troll.
    >
    >
    > ---
    > Ice Z - Straight Outta Redmond




  15. #45
    rakim Guest

    Re: Will VB hurt .NET? Instead of .NET helping VB?


    Well, the day i buy a supercomputer or a calculator running a VB app is the
    day i will accept this argument that Basic's heritage has anything to do
    with it's power. Apartment threading anyone?


    "Jonathan Allen" <greywolfcs@bigfoot.com> wrote:
    >He's just jealous. Everyone knows that Basic has a proud heritage that dates
    >back much further that C, and yet it continues to evolve as the
    >circumstances dictate. As long as Basic and it's sister language Fortran

    can
    >be found on everything from calculators to super computers, the brace
    >huggers will be depressed and angry. Poor masochistic freaks.
    >
    >--
    >Jonathan Allen
    >
    >
    >"Zane Thomas" <zane@mabry.com> wrote in message
    >news:3b5767a9.1498894062@news.devx.com...
    >> On 1 Feb 2001 23:02:55 -0800, "Ralph Freeze" <rfreeze@yahoo.com> wrote:
    >>
    >> >VB is not a programmers language and that's how it will always be.

    >>
    >> Go away silly troll.
    >>
    >>
    >> ---
    >> Ice Z - Straight Outta Redmond

    >
    >



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