Control Arrays in VB.NET

"Jabiru" <Jabiru@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:3bb99fe0$1@news.devx.com...
>
> >is VSA.Net which will be for know VB.Net only
> >(so I heard).
>
> Just looked at VSA.NET homepage which states:
> "VSA is built with a language-neutral architecture and future versions will
> support additional .NET languages."

I admit I spelled it incorrect, but I did write '... for (k)now ...'
Nobody knows when we can expect a future version.

Jens

[Tim]

Everything I see says if you're a VB prog. the transition to VB.NET is
easier and if you're a C/C++ prog. then C# would be easier to pick up.

I like you am sorry to see VB(as we know it today) go away. However
when I first started learning VB I didn't know sqaut about it either and
I've come a pretty good ways since then. Maybe I can do the same with
VB.NET. Don't know but It will be fun trying.

[Arthur Wood]

Tim,
The transition from VB 6 to VB.NET is like learning a new, though closely
related SPOKEN language...say for instance, Learning Spanish if you already
speak fluent Portugese. It is NOT like learning a completely un-related
language - like say, learning Russian if you already speak fluent Chinese(Mandarin)

In the Spanish-Portugese transition, you must be aware of the differences
in pronunciation, and syntax, but a great deal of the Vocabulary is very
close, and clear similarities are quite easily seen. So it is with the VB
6 to VB.Net transition.

On the other hand, in the transition from Chinese to Russian is MUCH more
traumatic - there are almost NO similarites whatsoever.


VB 6 to VB.Net is clearly MUCH closer to the former case than the latter.

Arthur Wood


Tim <here@home.com> wrote:
>Everything I see says if you're a VB prog. the transition to VB.NET is
>easier and if you're a C/C++ prog. then C# would be easier to pick up.
>
>I like you am sorry to see VB(as we know it today) go away. However
>when I first started learning VB I didn't know sqaut about it either and
>I've come a pretty good ways since then. Maybe I can do the same with
>VB.NET. Don't know but It will be fun trying.

[Rob Teixeira]

Both your points are a very accurate summary.

However, I've found that the move to VB.NET is nowhere near as difficult
as starting old VB from scratch.

-Rob

Tim <here@home.com> wrote:
>Everything I see says if you're a VB prog. the transition to VB.NET is
>easier and if you're a C/C++ prog. then C# would be easier to pick up.
>
>I like you am sorry to see VB(as we know it today) go away. However
>when I first started learning VB I didn't know sqaut about it either and
>I've come a pretty good ways since then. Maybe I can do the same with
>VB.NET. Don't know but It will be fun trying.

[max caber]

Learning C# and its twin brother VB.NET has become a fun and rewarding experience.
I have a strong VB6 and Java background. Java is much closer to C# and
VB.NET then any other language.

As far as the languages go C# is Java + (enums, delegates, events, structs,
attributes and a few other things), and VB.NET is C# without ; and {} and
the silly Dim statement.

I do wish that MS kept the key words the same for both languages. For example
C# uses virtual, overrides, and new where VB.NET uses something else. But
I guess this helps them sell more training which is good for me.

The API is the big thing to learn, and it is the same for both languages.
I have found xml serialization, remoting, and web services to be one of
my best computer experiences to date.

[Eddie Burdak]

Arthur,

"Arthur Wood" <wooda@saic-trsc.com> wrote in message
news:3be7d5ac@147.208.176.211...
>
> Tim,
> The transition from VB 6 to VB.NET is like learning a new, though
closely
> related SPOKEN language...say for instance, Learning Spanish if you
already
> speak fluent Portugese.

An interesting analogy.

> It is NOT like learning a completely un-related
> language - like say, learning Russian if you already speak fluent
Chinese(Mandarin)

Well with by very brief encounter with VB.NET so far I'm sorry but I'd have
to say it feels unrelated - definetly a Russian - Chinese kind of feeling.

For C++ guys and gals out there I believe your analogy is closer to mark but
for someone who "fiddles" about in VB and whose only other programming
language skills was (and still is) FORTRAN it looks like I have to make a
huge investment in time all over again.

Where I dont for one moment doubt the benifits it will bring me its just
that I'm not very good at learning spoken langauges and I have to cope with
3 spoken langauges each day.

Fortunately VB6 seems to co-exist with .NET happily but I know I have to
make the transition.

Eddie

[Phil Weber]

Nate: I have moved your question to the vb.dotnet.technical group. In the
future, please post VB.NET technical questions there. Thanks!
---
Phil Weber
DevX Newsgroup Admin

[Patrick Troughton]

NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.1.14.192
Message-ID: <3aba1199$1@news.devx.com>
Date: 22 Mar 2001 06:52:09 -0800
X-Trace: 22 Mar 2001 06:52:09 -0800, 209.1.14.192
Lines: 39
Path: news.devx.com
Xref: news.devx.com vb.dotnet.discussion:20699


"John Proffitt" <bogon@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>"Patrick Troughton" <Patrick@Troughton.com> wrote:
>>
>>Tag is a pointless hack that is no longer needed. I don't know how to make
>>it any clearer than that. As I said, I place a high premium on proper >design
>and technique. I don't mean this as an insult but perhaps I value >good
design
>more than you. But I would agree that its cost is trivial.
>>
>
>Tag is occasionally convenient. Merely that.

Yes.

> Some day you might want to consider the possibility that someone else
might
>see things differently than you do.

That's a silly thing to say. It's obvious that not everyone agrees with me.
But I can only show them the door.

> I'm happy to report that your opinion
>does not represent an objective state of affairs in the world.

I don't know anything about the affairs of the world, but everything I've
said in this newsgroup, I've been able to back up. I think that most of what
we're seeing here is fear of change. When emotion and logic conflict, emotion
often wins.

>Good design
>is as good design does. Does the code run? How soon?

What about readability, maintenance and type safety? I always take that into
account with my designs. But again, perhaps I value design and technique
more than others.

/Pat