Brain Washing - Page 4


DevX Home    Today's Headlines   Articles Archive   Tip Bank   Forums   

Page 4 of 11 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 46 to 60 of 153

Thread: Brain Washing

  1. #46
    Dan Barclay Guest

    Re: Brain Washing

    On Tue, 4 Sep 2001 14:10:18 -0400, Patrick Steele
    <psteele@ipdsolution.com_> wrote:

    >In article <aa3apt8j99k494npj2p5l8udrtite5gt5o@4ax.com> (from Dan
    >Barclay <Dan@MVPs.org>),
    >> Strangely enough, we'll probably have Kylix versions of our
    >> server software up before we have dotnet. It is simply too hard to
    >> convert VB to VB.net.

    >
    >Has the transition from VB to Delphi been easy (in terms of syntax,
    >built-in functions, etc..)?


    Not done yet, one of us here is working with a conversion tool vendor.
    It looks like it will be far easier than conversion to VB.net. I've
    been "over his shoulder" mostly on this since I'm on other projects.

    For someone as old as me, who's been Basic as long as I have, I don't
    know how you'd classify "easy" <g>. I don't like semicolons, colons
    and begin/end but other than a little typing and squinting it's pretty
    straightforward.

    It's also missing the ability to do "exploratory" development,
    concentrating on the outcome instead of declarations and such. That
    is, there is no Option on Explicit. Fine for production coding, but
    not worth crap for creativity (something VB has but MS doesn't
    understand either).

    Dan

    Language Stability is a *feature* I wish VB had!
    (#6)

  2. #47
    Mike Mitchell Guest

    Re: Brain Washing

    On Tue, 04 Sep 2001 12:19:25 -0500, Dan Barclay <Dan@MVPs.org> wrote:

    >Looking at lots of things. Delphi gives us the ability to do Linux
    >stuff using Kylix. There is also a VB converter that's beginning to
    >work fairly well. See http://www.deluxsoftware.com/


    Dan, do you have contact with those guys? I sent them an e-mail a week
    or so ago, asking when the promised version 2 demo would be available.
    The web page said it's in the download area, but I could only download
    a version 1.3. Does seem pretty impressive, though, but they never
    responded to my e-mail.

    MM

  3. #48
    Mike Mitchell Guest

    Re: Brain Washing

    On Tue, 04 Sep 2001 13:41:11 -0500, Dan Barclay <Dan@MVPs.org> wrote:

    >Even if you don't have existing apps, using something like this looks
    >like it will be a good way to "learn" the new environment.


    This is where I see my main use for a tool like this. I wouldn't want
    to just blindly use a conversion tool and churn out reams of 'foreign'
    code without knowing pretty much what that code was doing. But as a
    tool to assist learning I think it could be invaluable. Probably quite
    an expensive luxury as a learning tool, maybe, but if it helps learn
    the product that much faster, it could be that I'm saving money in the
    long run.

    In any case, I really hope they succeed, because it's good to hear of
    anybody who is willing to put a lot of effort into something like this
    to keep the classic VB heart alive, albeit beating in a Delphi/Kylix
    body!

    MM

  4. #49
    Dan Barclay Guest

    Re: Brain Washing

    On Tue, 04 Sep 2001 21:03:03 GMT, kylix_is@hotmail.com (Mike Mitchell)
    wrote:

    >On Tue, 04 Sep 2001 13:41:11 -0500, Dan Barclay <Dan@MVPs.org> wrote:
    >
    >>Even if you don't have existing apps, using something like this looks
    >>like it will be a good way to "learn" the new environment.

    >
    >This is where I see my main use for a tool like this. I wouldn't want
    >to just blindly use a conversion tool and churn out reams of 'foreign'
    >code without knowing pretty much what that code was doing.


    Certainly, you have to know what the new code (and the conversion
    process) is doing. The question is whether you can stop at that.

    >But as a
    >tool to assist learning I think it could be invaluable. Probably quite
    >an expensive luxury as a learning tool, maybe, but if it helps learn
    >the product that much faster, it could be that I'm saving money in the
    >long run.
    >
    >In any case, I really hope they succeed, because it's good to hear of
    >anybody who is willing to put a lot of effort into something like this
    >to keep the classic VB heart alive, albeit beating in a Delphi/Kylix
    >body!


    Yes, I may find myself doing some hacking in VB then converting <g>.

    Dan
    Language Stability is a *feature* I wish VB had!
    (#6)

  5. #50
    Dan Fergus Guest

    Re: Brain Washing

    Wait, time out...

    You are worried about and complaining about the VB6 to VB.NET upgrade wizard
    but you would look at a product that changes your code from VB to..
    something else?

    <quote from webpage>
    Translates most standard Visual Basic code and forms from VB3/4/5/6.
    The class mapping contains most common controls, properties, methods and
    events.
    </quote>

    Most code and forms and Most common controls! Go figure!

    Dan


    "Mike Mitchell" <kylix_is@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:3b953f18.12278633@news.devx.com...
    > On Tue, 04 Sep 2001 12:19:25 -0500, Dan Barclay <Dan@MVPs.org> wrote:
    >
    > >Looking at lots of things. Delphi gives us the ability to do Linux
    > >stuff using Kylix. There is also a VB converter that's beginning to
    > >work fairly well. See http://www.deluxsoftware.com/

    >
    > Dan, do you have contact with those guys? I sent them an e-mail a week
    > or so ago, asking when the promised version 2 demo would be available.
    > The web page said it's in the download area, but I could only download
    > a version 1.3. Does seem pretty impressive, though, but they never
    > responded to my e-mail.
    >
    > MM




  6. #51
    Patrick Steele Guest

    Re: Brain Washing

    In article <238apt8t199js9l3vc926dm13bb6kqhk25@4ax.com> (from Dan
    Barclay <Dan@MVPs.org>),
    > For someone as old as me, who's been Basic as long as I have, I don't
    > know how you'd classify "easy" <g>.


    Yes, it is subjective. I guess my use of "easy" was in response to
    your statement that moving to VB.NET at this point was "simply too
    hard". I know VB.NET breaks a lot of existing code, but is it "hard" to
    port because of the syntax changes or the long-term stability?

    My guess, due to your sig, is the latter!

    --
    Patrick Steele

  7. #52
    Dan Barclay Guest

    Re: Brain Washing

    On Wed, 5 Sep 2001 09:01:33 -0400, Patrick Steele
    <psteele@ipdsolution.com_> wrote:

    >In article <238apt8t199js9l3vc926dm13bb6kqhk25@4ax.com> (from Dan
    >Barclay <Dan@MVPs.org>),
    >> For someone as old as me, who's been Basic as long as I have, I don't
    >> know how you'd classify "easy" <g>.

    >
    >Yes, it is subjective. I guess my use of "easy" was in response to
    >your statement that moving to VB.NET at this point was "simply too
    >hard". I know VB.NET breaks a lot of existing code, but is it "hard" to
    >port because of the syntax changes or the long-term stability?


    Both, but syntax changes are the killer (that said, syntax changes are
    a symptom of the latter).

    I, like a number of long time Basic developers, are less concerned
    about being politically correct than we are about using all the tools
    we can to create maintainable code. I use GoSub to wrap repeated
    code fragments and, in many cases, Calls with long parameter lists.
    I've been using Basic since *way* before it was cool and have focused
    on the apps and my ability to care for them in the long term.

    Delphi has a clean substitute for Gosub in that you can declare
    procedures within procedures. The "contained" procedure shares all
    the variables of its host without having to resort to module level
    variables.

    VB.net has *nothing* to support this functionality. You either have
    to declare scads of module level vars (making them permanent data and
    creating the potential for conflict with other procs in the module) or
    have huge parameter lists.

    The VB devs just don't "get it" and they don't care.

    >My guess, due to your sig, is the latter!


    There are short term issues, and there are long term issues. They are
    connected.

    Dan
    Language Stability is a *feature* I wish VB had!
    (#6)

  8. #53
    Zane Thomas Guest

    Re: Brain Washing

    On Wed, 05 Sep 2001 11:49:11 -0500, Dan Barclay <Dan@MVPs.org> wrote:

    >You either have
    >to declare scads of module level vars (making them permanent data and
    >creating the potential for conflict with other procs in the module) or
    >have huge parameter lists.


    Or you can refactor, or pass structures or objects.


    --
    The nice thing about standards is that
    there are so many of them to choose from.

  9. #54
    Dan Barclay Guest

    Re: Brain Washing

    On Wed, 05 Sep 2001 17:26:00 GMT, zane@mabry.com (Zane Thomas) wrote:

    >On Wed, 05 Sep 2001 11:49:11 -0500, Dan Barclay <Dan@MVPs.org> wrote:
    >
    >>You either have
    >>to declare scads of module level vars (making them permanent data and
    >>creating the potential for conflict with other procs in the module) or
    >>have huge parameter lists.

    >
    >Or you can refactor, or pass structures or objects.


    Refactoring is how I got where I am on most of it. Most of this code
    is where I want it from a structure standpoint. I do still have some
    really old stuff that could benefit from being "refactored", but I'd
    want to use GoSub (as it was intended to be used) for a code
    container.

    As to passing structures or objects, some of the long parameter lists
    use different combinations of parameters depending on context. While
    I could reduce the length of the list, it would still be a list.
    Helpful but not a solution.

    The point isn't to find workarounds and hacks. They have (had) a good
    thing and threw it out because they don't understand it. Of course,
    that could be said for most of Basic... MS as a whole doesn't
    understand its popularity.

    Dan
    Language Stability is a *feature* I wish VB had!
    (#6)

  10. #55
    Zane Thomas Guest

    Re: Brain Washing

    On Wed, 05 Sep 2001 12:52:10 -0500, Dan Barclay <Dan@MVPs.org> wrote:

    >The point isn't to find workarounds and hacks.


    No, the point is to work with what's there the way it was designed to be
    used.


    --
    The nice thing about standards is that
    there are so many of them to choose from.

  11. #56
    Dan Barclay Guest

    Re: Brain Washing

    On Wed, 05 Sep 2001 19:32:46 GMT, zane@mabry.com (Zane Thomas) wrote:

    >>The point isn't to find workarounds and hacks.

    >
    >No, the point is to work with what's there the way it was designed to be
    >used.


    I agree. I already did that. It doesn't work now.

    Again.

    Likewise, what makes you think passing UDT's, collections, and objects
    will work 3 releases from now?

    Actually, I guess UDT's aren't really there now since it's just a glob
    of objects. Yea, maybe I should use a collection 'cause that's closer
    to what they're doing under the hood. Then again, maybe that's what
    they'll drop.

    I'm tired of trying to outguess them. Nothing is sacred when you have
    to raise **** just to get logical expressions to work right and they
    still don't "get it". It's turned into a language designed by
    marketeers based on what someone tells them is Cool Today.

    Dan
    Language Stability is a *feature* I wish VB had!
    (#6)

  12. #57
    Zane Thomas Guest

    Re: Brain Washing

    Dan,

    >Likewise, what makes you think passing UDT's, collections, and objects
    >will work 3 releases from now?


    That's silly Dan, the .net platform is built around objects and as long as
    it exists you will be able to pass objects around. Also, I don't see any
    major changes in approaches to programming on the horizon - but when such
    a change comes, and it will eventually, then I'll go with it since the
    evolution of technology is inevitable and those who don't go with it get
    left behind.


    >I'm tired of trying to outguess them.


    I'm reminded of a poster I saw once: There are two fences intersecting at
    right angles, so there are four cornert. In each corner is a cow with his
    head stuck through the fence to the right so that it can eat the grass in
    the other cow's corner.



    --
    The nice thing about standards is that
    there are so many of them to choose from.

  13. #58
    Dan Barclay Guest

    Re: Brain Washing

    On Wed, 05 Sep 2001 20:34:54 GMT, zane@mabry.com (Zane Thomas) wrote:

    >>Likewise, what makes you think passing UDT's, collections, and objects
    >>will work 3 releases from now?

    >
    >That's silly Dan, the .net platform is built around objects and as long as
    >it exists you will be able to pass objects around.


    I have no doubt. The question is *how* you pass them around. What
    will be their form, from a language standpoint. They don't even need
    to be "variables", certainly they don't need to keep typenames or
    other language representations the same (used any 16bit Integers
    lately?). Just because something is possible doesn't mean it will be
    stable (or even there). The .net platform doesn't preclude GoSub.
    Doesn't work.

    > Also, I don't see any
    >major changes in approaches to programming on the horizon - but when such
    >a change comes, and it will eventually,


    If it were to come because of some driving force and/or need it would
    be fine. When it comes from some marketwiz's urge to be "cool" it
    sucks.

    >then I'll go with it since the
    >evolution of technology is inevitable and those who don't go with it get
    >left behind.


    LOL! I haven't been left behind yet. Trouble is in rushing forward
    when you don't (yet) know which way is forward.

    I think you know better than to think I'm not keeping up with .net
    (and other delivery platforms) both from a user base and technology
    standpoint. Even if it turns out .net is the right direction, it
    doesn't make VB.net any more attractive for "legacy" apps.

    >>I'm tired of trying to outguess them.

    >
    >I'm reminded of a poster I saw once: There are two fences intersecting at
    >right angles, so there are four cornert. In each corner is a cow with his
    >head stuck through the fence to the right so that it can eat the grass in
    >the other cow's corner.


    I don't see greener grass in any of the corners (including .net). I'm
    just making sure there is a gate in all the fences (and have a key) so
    I can get somewhere if this one dries up. If you wanna stick your
    head through the fence, go ahead. I'll watch.

    Dan
    Language Stability is a *feature* I wish VB had!
    (#6)

  14. #59
    Ian R Guest

    Re: Brain Washing


    "Dan Barclay" <Dan@MVPs.org> wrote in message
    news:mrocptkc60uqfsgdunnfl0a2i894sbh97t@4ax.com...
    >
    > As to passing structures or objects, some of the long parameter lists
    > use different combinations of parameters depending on context. While
    > I could reduce the length of the list, it would still be a list.
    > Helpful but not a solution.
    >


    This is where overloaded methods would be useful, no ?



  15. #60
    Mike Mitchell Guest

    Re: Brain Washing

    On Tue, 4 Sep 2001 19:12:08 -0500, "Dan Fergus" <dan@vbforest.com>
    wrote:

    >Wait, time out...
    >
    >You are worried about and complaining about the VB6 to VB.NET upgrade wizard
    >but you would look at a product that changes your code from VB to..
    >something else?


    The "something else" is Delphi/Kylix, neither of which need a massive,
    bloated .NET framework to run in. I've written some simple Delphi apps
    which need absolutely nothing except bog-standard Windows 95 to run.
    Couldn't be simpler, so what, exactly, are you complaining about? Or
    are you looking for complexity for its own sake? If so, stick with
    Microsoft - they do it in spades.

    MM

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