Sticking with VB.NET


DevX Home    Today's Headlines   Articles Archive   Tip Bank   Forums   

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 50

Thread: Sticking with VB.NET

  1. #1
    Ian Lowe Guest

    Sticking with VB.NET

    Playing with the Beta, I realized that I had a choice. Stick with VB and
    learn the new VB.NET, or migrate now to C# while to world was young. Never
    having used a C-syntax language before, I poked around and realized I could
    probably learn it relatively easily, especially compared to learning C++ (I
    have two books on learning C++...I don't have the time to figure it out).

    I've decided to stick with VB.NET for one main reason: syntax. C# continues
    to use non-intuitive syntax. Concidering that C# is a high-level language,
    this is a complete arbitrary (or rather, marketing) decision. I believe that
    languages should be moving towards more commonsensical, or English-like
    syntax to promote wider adoption of programming and more time spent solving
    problems rather than learning syntax.

    I believe that using C# would support an elitist and narrow vision of
    language evolution. I will continue to use VB.NET in the hopes of
    encouraging future development of more "natural-language" programming
    languages.

    How do others feel about this?

    Ian.



  2. #2
    Jason Kaczor Guest

    Re: Sticking with VB.NET


    "Ian Lowe" <idlowe@home.com> wrote:
    >Never having used a C-syntax language before, I poked around and realized


    >I could probably learn it relatively easily, especially compared to
    >learning C++ (I have two books on learning C++...I don't have the time to


    >figure it out).


    Likewise, though I have used Java, I hate the C-style-syntax.

    >I've decided to stick with VB.NET for one main reason: syntax. C#
    >continues to use non-intuitive syntax.


    <shrug />, so does Java, so does JavaScript.

    >I believe that languages should be moving towards more commonsensical, or


    >English-like syntax to promote wider adoption of programming and more
    >time spent solving problems rather than learning syntax.


    Couldn't agree more (Go, go, go Kylix & Object Pascal... ra ra ra!)

    >I believe that using C# would support an elitist and narrow vision of
    >language evolution.


    Well, couldn't be any worse than many C++ MFC/ATL guys wrinkling their noses
    at us "vb-slime"...

    >I will continue to use VB.NET in the hopes of encouraging future
    >development of more "natural-language" programming languages.


    Sigh, still have some optimism left. I myself am going to start in on C#...
    It is, and will continue to be the premier language for .NET.

    The latest code samples from Microsoft? I'll betchya their in C# first...
    The latest language features? C# (See thread about XML doc, XML persistence)...

    Personally I feel that it is in my best interest to learn this C-syntax that
    is remarkably similar to other syntaxes and technologies. I hate it now,
    but frankly I would hate being a "2nd class" citizen under VB.NET even more.

    >How do others feel about this?


    At first I was in complete love with VB.NET. Over time I'm finding that
    C# seems to be the area for me to focus on.

    >Ian.


    Regards
    Jason Kaczor

  3. #3
    Manohar Kamath Guest

    Re: Sticking with VB.NET

    Ian,

    I think your decision is way too easy. I have worked with Assembler (I used
    to love it), C, C++, a bit of Java and then VB. For me, choosing C# is like
    going back to my roots, while VB.NET would provide a simpler transition. I
    think I might learn both languages - always helps to know more

    Although I agree a programming language should be simple (not necessarily
    English-like), I respectfully disagree that it should be the only reason one
    should pick the language. Doing that would be like learning to fly without
    knowing about bernoulli's principle or weather or wind patterns. Yes, one
    could fly, but with a good foundation one could not only fly, but could also
    manage in troubled times.

    My perspective is this - C like languages provide a great insight into
    programming principles - pointers and stuff. Once equipped with these
    principles, one can choose any other language that he/she is comfortable
    with.

    --
    Manohar Kamath
    www.dotnet101.com - .NET Tutorials
    www.dotnetwire.com - .NET News
    www.dotnetbooks.com - .NET Books


    "Ian Lowe" <idlowe@home.com> wrote in message
    news:3aa7fa35$1@news.devx.com...
    > Playing with the Beta, I realized that I had a choice. Stick with VB and
    > learn the new VB.NET, or migrate now to C# while to world was young. Never
    > having used a C-syntax language before, I poked around and realized I

    could
    > probably learn it relatively easily, especially compared to learning C++

    (I
    > have two books on learning C++...I don't have the time to figure it out).
    >
    > I've decided to stick with VB.NET for one main reason: syntax. C#

    continues
    > to use non-intuitive syntax. Concidering that C# is a high-level language,
    > this is a complete arbitrary (or rather, marketing) decision. I believe

    that
    > languages should be moving towards more commonsensical, or English-like
    > syntax to promote wider adoption of programming and more time spent

    solving
    > problems rather than learning syntax.
    >
    > I believe that using C# would support an elitist and narrow vision of
    > language evolution. I will continue to use VB.NET in the hopes of
    > encouraging future development of more "natural-language" programming
    > languages.
    >
    > How do others feel about this?
    >
    > Ian.
    >
    >




  4. #4
    Larry Serflaten Guest

    Re: Sticking with VB.NET


    "Ian Lowe" <idlowe@home.com> wrote
    > How do others feel about this?


    I am reserving judgment until after the products are released.
    Although I have mostly played with VB.Net, as others pointed
    out, C# may be better supported....

    LFS




  5. #5
    Ian Lowe Guest

    Re: Sticking with VB.NET

    Hi, Jason,

    Stuffs been <snip>'d throughout. Comments inline

    > >I've decided to stick with VB.NET for one main reason: syntax. C#
    > >continues to use non-intuitive syntax.

    >
    > <shrug />, so does Java, so does JavaScript.


    That's largely the point. Other "popular" languages are changing the
    underlyng system (OO and all of that) but keeping the same old syntax. The
    only reason to keep the old syntax is to make it more friendly to the
    already-C'd programmers. However, I would suggest more gains in market share
    and productivity could be made by coming up with a more commonsensical
    syntax.

    > Couldn't agree more (Go, go, go Kylix & Object Pascal... ra ra ra!)


    Don't know these. Are their syntaxes (sp?) better?

    > >I believe that using C# would support an elitist and narrow vision of
    > >language evolution.

    >
    > Well, couldn't be any worse than many C++ MFC/ATL guys wrinkling their

    noses
    > at us "vb-slime"...


    This is what I mean elitist. "Only people who can properly dereference a
    static pointer to a dynamically created memory block are real programmers."
    (Does that even make sense?). This gets in the way of people cooperating to
    improve the overall environment. Its like someone telling you you don't
    really speak English unless you can properly identify gerunds or
    prepositional phrases in any given sentence.

    > Personally I feel that it is in my best interest to learn this C-syntax

    that
    > is remarkably similar to other syntaxes and technologies. I hate it now,
    > but frankly I would hate being a "2nd class" citizen under VB.NET even

    more.

    And this gets my goat. I don't mind being a 2nd class citizen. I don't have
    time to master pointer manipulation. I've got a job to do. What does bother
    me is the sense that I'm not really programming because my (non-tech) boss
    can take a stab at deciphering my code. That's bad? That's good! Well, maybe
    not the boss part. But language shouldn't get in the way of application of
    logic to solve a problem (ie, programming).

    > >How do others feel about this?

    >
    > At first I was in complete love with VB.NET. Over time I'm finding that
    > C# seems to be the area for me to focus on.
    >
    > >Ian.

    >
    > Regards
    > Jason Kaczor


    Ian.



  6. #6
    Jason Kaczor Guest

    Re: Sticking with VB.NET


    "Ian Lowe" <idlowe@home.com> wrote:
    >
    >That's largely the point. Other "popular" languages are changing the
    >underlyng system (OO and all of that) but keeping the same old syntax. The
    >only reason to keep the old syntax is to make it more friendly to the
    >already-C'd programmers. However, I would suggest more gains in market
    >share and productivity could be made by coming up with a more
    >commonsensical syntax.


    And the C guys will argue that {} is far more productive than begin/end statements.
    Less typing=higher productivity. I disagree, and therefore agree with you.

    >> Couldn't agree more (Go, go, go Kylix & Object Pascal... ra ra ra!)

    >
    >Don't know these. Are their syntaxes (sp?) better?


    Delphi/Kylix is Borland's implementation of Object Pascal (yes, there is
    at least one other implementation that I know of: FreePascal).

    Object Pascal uses "begin/end" statements to determine blocks, and is more
    "english-like" than C/C++/C#/Java. It's only hold-over is ";" for end-of-line
    termination.

    >This is what I mean elitist. "Only people who can properly dereference a
    >static pointer to a dynamically created memory block are real
    >programmers." (Does that even make sense?).


    Strangely enough, for me it does. But only because Delphi supports pointers
    quite well.

    >And this gets my goat. I don't mind being a 2nd class citizen.


    I'm sick of it. .NET/CLR was supposed to provide us with a standard, common-ground.

    >I don't have time to master pointer manipulation. I've got a job to do.



    No pointers in C# without un-managed code. Don't write un-managed code.
    No pointers in Java/JavaScript which have the same C-like syntax.

    >not the boss part. But language shouldn't get in the way of application

    of
    >logic to solve a problem (ie, programming).


    Correct. However unless you are willing to define a syntax, create a parser
    and implement a .NET compiler for your language, we have to work with what
    we have. 5, 10, 50, 500, 5000 voices crying for change in the VB.NET world
    are going to fall on deaf ears.

    >Ian.


    Regards
    Jason Kaczor

  7. #7
    Gregor R. Peisker Guest

    Re: Sticking with VB.NET

    Hi Jason,

    > Object Pascal uses "begin/end" statements to determine blocks, and is more
    > "english-like" than C/C++/C#/Java.


    IMO, Pascal's "begin" and "end;" is little better than curly braces:

    Pascal:

    end;
    end;
    end;

    C:

    }
    }
    }

    Basic:

    Next i
    End If
    End Function


    Regards,
    Gregor





  8. #8
    Joe \Nuke Me Xemu\ Foster Guest

    Re: Sticking with VB.NET

    "Jason Kaczor" <jkaczor@acoupleanerds.com> wrote in message <news:3aa8e7f3$1@news.devx.com>...

    > Object Pascal uses "begin/end" statements to determine blocks, and is more
    > "english-like" than C/C++/C#/Java. It's only hold-over is ";" for end-of-line
    > termination.


    It's worse than that. Pascal uses ";" for statement separation. It's a
    subtle difference, but it's the cause of premature balding in quite a
    few students. Nicklaus Wirth apparently feels Pascal should be quietly
    put out of his misery. Component Pascal.Net or Oberon-2.Net might be
    interesting, however.

    Component Pascal: http://www.oberon.ch/docu/language_report.html

    --
    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!



  9. #9
    Jonathan Allen Guest

    Re: Sticking with VB.NET

    > IMO, Pascal's "begin" and "end;" is little better than curly braces:

    I agree. A good end construct should remind you what you are ending. Not
    only does this make code easier to read, it allows the IDE and compiler to
    be smarter.


    --
    Jonathan Allen




  10. #10
    Ian Lowe Guest

    Re: Sticking with VB.NET

    > > IMO, Pascal's "begin" and "end;" is little better than curly braces:
    >
    > I agree. A good end construct should remind you what you are ending. Not
    > only does this make code easier to read, it allows the IDE and compiler to
    > be smarter.


    Yeah! Repetitive "end"s are English replacement's for "}"s. Might as well
    finish each block with "cheese". (Sorry, overstated I know.) VB's For...Next
    blocks are much clearer (and I would argue could be improved to something
    like "As x Goes From y To z...Repeat"). The power and complexity of
    computers is being ignored by continuing to use syntax whose primary
    objective is the jargonification (is that a word?) of logic. When I execute
    a For...Next block, I'm saying "Do the following steps a X number of times".
    Why doesn't the syntax say that?

    In this perspective, VB's Do...Loop and If...End If syntax is very clear,
    IMHO. I plan to continue to support VB to encourage more commonsensical
    syntax. That is, syntax that reflects the actual logic, not some jargon
    derivitive.

    Ian.



  11. #11
    Larry Serflaten Guest

    Re: Sticking with VB.NET


    "Ian Lowe" <idlowe@home.com> wrote in message news:3aa9a969$1@news.devx.com...
    > > > IMO, Pascal's "begin" and "end;" is little better than curly braces:

    > >
    > > I agree. A good end construct should remind you what you are ending. Not
    > > only does this make code easier to read, it allows the IDE and compiler to
    > > be smarter.

    >
    > Yeah! Repetitive "end"s are English replacement's for "}"s. Might as well
    > finish each block with "cheese". (Sorry, overstated I know.) VB's For...Next
    > blocks are much clearer (and I would argue could be improved to something
    > like "As x Goes From y To z...Repeat"). The power and complexity of
    > computers is being ignored by continuing to use syntax whose primary
    > objective is the jargonification (is that a word?) of logic. When I execute
    > a For...Next block, I'm saying "Do the following steps a X number of times".
    > Why doesn't the syntax say that?


    You have heard of "For Each Item In Collection", there the syntax reads OK.
    The earlier syntax is only missing one word to make it 'readable':

    For X = 1 to 20 > For when X equals 1 to 20

    The word When might have been suggested before For, I guess we would have
    to ask the authors. It may have been that When was discarded due to ambiguity,
    and memory constraints. Thats just a guess, but it reads OK in English....

    When X = 1 To 20
    '...
    Next X

    LFS







  12. #12
    Jonathan Allen Guest

    Re: Sticking with VB.NET

    I suspect For came from Fortran. As for When, I kinda like it.

    --
    Jonathan Allen


    "Larry Serflaten" <serflaten@usinternet.com> wrote in message
    news:3aa9da9f$1@news.devx.com...
    >
    >
    > You have heard of "For Each Item In Collection", there the syntax reads

    OK.
    > The earlier syntax is only missing one word to make it 'readable':
    >
    > For X = 1 to 20 > For when X equals 1 to 20
    >
    > The word When might have been suggested before For, I guess we would have
    > to ask the authors. It may have been that When was discarded due to

    ambiguity,
    > and memory constraints. Thats just a guess, but it reads OK in

    English....
    >
    > When X = 1 To 20
    > '...
    > Next X
    >
    > LFS
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >




  13. #13
    William Cleveland Guest

    Re: Sticking with VB.NET

    Jason Kaczor wrote:
    >
    > Object Pascal uses "begin/end" statements to determine blocks, and is more
    > "english-like" than C/C++/C#/Java. It's only hold-over is ";" for end-of-line
    > termination.
    >

    Pascal doesn't get that from C. I'm not sure which of the two
    languages are older, but both get their general organization from
    Algol. AFAIK, Algol was a lot more like Pascal than like C.

    Bill

  14. #14
    Mark Burns Guest

    Re: Sticking with VB.NET


    "Ian Lowe" <idlowe@home.com> wrote in message
    news:3aa9a969$1@news.devx.com...
    > The power and complexity of computers is being ignored by continuing
    > to use syntax whose primary objective is the jargonification (is that a

    word?) of logic.

    Ian! I love that! I don't know if you've truely coined that word, but I'm
    penciling in you for credit - at least until further information is made
    available on that question.
    Ok all, new entry for your Dictionaries!

    Jargonification <v>: The act of obfuscating logic and/or meaning by the
    (excessive) use of Jargon words.

    :-)



  15. #15
    rmeklo Guest

    Re: Sticking with VB.NET


    jargonification (is that a word?)

    Yes.

    (http://news.devx.com/cgi-bin/dnewswe...em=19517&utag=)

    The "anthropomorphization" section may be of special interest.


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