The Classic VB Programmer vs the VB.NET Programmer


DevX Home    Today's Headlines   Articles Archive   Tip Bank   Forums   

Page 1 of 10 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 144

Thread: The Classic VB Programmer vs the VB.NET Programmer

  1. #1
    Dave Doknjas Guest

    The Classic VB Programmer vs the VB.NET Programmer


    The Classic VB Programmer:

    1. Primarily focuses on the business problem at hand. Coding (including architecture
    and design) is only secondary. Thinks about coding only to the extent that
    it provides a solution to the business problem. Regards coding as a tool,
    not as a way of life.

    2. Embraces as many black boxes as possible, provided that they are reliable
    and supported.

    3. Doesn't care whether the development methodology they are using is unsophisticated
    or inconsistent with the methodology used by people who regard coding as
    a way of life.

    4. Counts from 1, as do most other human beings.

    5. Gets invited to parties.

    The VB.NET Programmer:

    1. Regards coding as a way of life and takes pride in the complexity of their
    code.

    2. Would like to code as much as possible from scratch since they are insecure
    in the knowledge that they would otherwise be relying on code which may be
    more complex than their own.

    3. Is insecure when reminded of what the "B" stands for in VB. To counter
    this, they are determined to embrace every obfuscation used by others who
    regard coding as a way of life.

    4. Counts from 0, as do very few other human beings. Also finds it strange
    that anyone would want to count from 1.

    5. Doesn't get invited to parties. At their own parties they talk about coding.



  2. #2
    Frank Oquendo Guest

    Re: The Classic VB Programmer vs the VB.NET Programmer

    Dave Doknjas <dave_doknjas@yahoo.ca> had this to say:

    blah, blah, blah.

    The name of the group is vb.dotnet.discussion, not stuck.in.the.past.
    Learn VB.NET or learn something else. Personally, I'm hoping you learn
    something else so you can clog up a totally different news server with
    your endless *****ing.

    --
    http://www.acadx.com
    "If you want to be somebody else change your mind"







  3. #3
    Dave Doknjas Guest

    Re: The Classic VB Programmer vs the VB.NET Programmer


    Yeah, I guess I'm just itching for a fight...

  4. #4
    Dave Doknjas Guest

    Re: The Classic VB Programmer vs the VB.NET Programmer



    >The name of the group is vb.dotnet.discussion, not stuck.in.the.past.
    >Learn VB.NET or learn something else. Personally, I'm hoping you learn
    >something else so you can clog up a totally different news server with
    >your endless *****ing.
    >
    >--

    I am converting to .NET. I'm just ashamed of the type of developer I'm becoming
    in order to do this...

  5. #5
    Rob Teixeira Guest

    Re: The Classic VB Programmer vs the VB.NET Programmer



    Some kind of inferior tribalism complex?

    -Rob

    "Dave Doknjas" <dave_doknjas@yahoo.ca> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>The name of the group is vb.dotnet.discussion, not stuck.in.the.past.
    >>Learn VB.NET or learn something else. Personally, I'm hoping you learn
    >>something else so you can clog up a totally different news server with
    >>your endless *****ing.
    >>
    >>--

    >I am converting to .NET. I'm just ashamed of the type of developer I'm becoming
    >in order to do this...



  6. #6
    Dave Doknjas Guest

    Re: The Classic VB Programmer vs the VB.NET Programmer


    "Rob Teixeira" <RobTeixeira@@msn.com> wrote:
    >
    >Some kind of inferior tribalism complex?
    >
    >"Dave Doknjas" <dave_doknjas@yahoo.ca> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>I am converting to .NET. I'm just ashamed of the type of developer I'm

    becoming
    >>in order to do this...

    >


    I'm confident that with a little patience I too can become a smug, know-it-all,
    narrow-minded .NET developer also. I'll also code everything from scratch
    and laugh at people who want black boxes.



  7. #7
    Patrick Troughton Guest

    Re: The Classic VB Programmer vs the VB.NET Programmer


    Your post might make good propaganda for the .NOTters but has little basis
    in fact.....

    1) VB.NET is a easier to use than VB6, is more consistant and an easier syntax
    to learn. VB.NET requires far fewer hacks and fewer Win32 API calls. If you
    want to be free to concentrate on business logic, VB.NET is the way to go.
    If you like writing slimy hacks, lots of redundant code and complicated
    API calls, then VB6 is for you.

    2) VB.NET provides a lot more built-in functionality (blackboxes as you call
    them) than VB6, so again, you're wrong on this point. It doesn't sound like
    you've used VB.NET much.

    3) I'm not embarrassed what the 'B' stands for. If anything, VB.NET is a
    better beginner's language than VB6.

    4) Actually, sometimes VB6 uses zero as a base, sometimes 1. At least VB.NET
    is consistant. So again, VB.NET wins on this point.

    And this is coming from someone who's used VB "classic" for about 6 years
    and VB.NET for less than 2....

    /Pat

    "Dave Doknjas" <dave_doknjas@yahoo.ca> wrote:
    >
    >The Classic VB Programmer:
    >
    >1. Primarily focuses on the business problem at hand. Coding (including

    architecture
    >and design) is only secondary. Thinks about coding only to the extent that
    >it provides a solution to the business problem. Regards coding as a tool,
    >not as a way of life.
    >
    >2. Embraces as many black boxes as possible, provided that they are reliable
    >and supported.
    >
    >3. Doesn't care whether the development methodology they are using is unsophisticated
    >or inconsistent with the methodology used by people who regard coding as
    >a way of life.
    >
    >4. Counts from 1, as do most other human beings.
    >
    >5. Gets invited to parties.
    >
    >The VB.NET Programmer:
    >
    >1. Regards coding as a way of life and takes pride in the complexity of

    their
    >code.
    >
    >2. Would like to code as much as possible from scratch since they are insecure
    >in the knowledge that they would otherwise be relying on code which may

    be
    >more complex than their own.
    >
    >3. Is insecure when reminded of what the "B" stands for in VB. To counter
    >this, they are determined to embrace every obfuscation used by others who
    >regard coding as a way of life.
    >
    >4. Counts from 0, as do very few other human beings. Also finds it strange
    >that anyone would want to count from 1.
    >
    >5. Doesn't get invited to parties. At their own parties they talk about

    coding.
    >
    >



  8. #8
    Patrick Troughton Guest

    Re: The Classic VB Programmer vs the VB.NET Programmer


    Cool. When you come up with some good points, let us know....<G>

    /Pat

    "Dave Doknjas" <dave_doknjas@yahoo.ca> wrote:
    >
    >Yeah, I guess I'm just itching for a fight...



  9. #9
    Patrick Troughton Guest

    Re: The Classic VB Programmer vs the VB.NET Programmer


    See, that makes no sense. VB.NET comes with a lot more built-in functionality
    than VB6. So if you want more black boxes, VB.NET walks all over VB6. Plus,
    VB.NET allows you to inherit from these blackboxes to create your own....

    /Pat

    "Dave Doknjas" <dave_doknjas@yahoo.ca> wrote:
    >
    >I'm confident that with a little patience I too can become a smug, know-it-all,
    >narrow-minded .NET developer also. I'll also code everything from scratch
    >and laugh at people who want black boxes.
    >
    >



  10. #10
    Dave Doknjas Guest

    Re: The Classic VB Programmer vs the VB.NET Programmer


    >4) Actually, sometimes VB6 uses zero as a base, sometimes 1. At least VB.NET
    >is consistant. So again, VB.NET wins on this point.
    >

    Granted, .NET is more consistent, but zero basing is consistent only among
    geeks.


  11. #11
    Frank Oquendo Guest

    Re: The Classic VB Programmer vs the VB.NET Programmer

    Dave Doknjas <dave_doknjas@yahoo.ca> had this to say:

    > Granted, .NET is more consistent, but zero basing is consistent
    > only among geeks.

    ^^^^^

    You misspelled "every other major language". HTH.

    --
    http://www.acadx.com
    "If you want to be somebody else change your mind"







  12. #12
    Frank Oquendo Guest

    Re: The Classic VB Programmer vs the VB.NET Programmer

    Dave Doknjas <dave_doknjas@yahoo.ca> had this to say:

    > I am converting to .NET. I'm just ashamed of the type of developer
    > I'm becoming in order to do this...


    What kind of programmer might that be? Educated? Skilled? Marketable?
    Sucks, doesn't it?

    I can't believe you're *****ing about not being a bushleaguer for the
    rest of your life.

    --
    http://www.acadx.com
    "If you want to be somebody else change your mind"







  13. #13
    Michael Culley Guest

    Re: The Classic VB Programmer vs the VB.NET Programmer

    Dave is a troll and I hate to agree with him but I think zero based indexing
    sucks. Where in the real world does indexing ever start at zero (I'm sure
    that someone will come up with some obscure example but it will be just
    that, obscure).

    However, if I had the choice between zero based indexing of .net and the mix
    of vb6 i'd take consistency any day.

    Dave,

    > 4. Counts from 0, as do very few other human beings. Also finds it
    > strange that anyone would want to count from 1.


    Doesn't the fact that you are concerned about zero based vs 1 based put you
    in the second category, surely the "business" programmer would just accept
    what he was given and get on with the job?

    --
    Michael Culley
    www.vbdotcom.com




  14. #14
    lensman Guest

    Re: The Classic VB Programmer vs the VB.NET Programmer

    "Dave Doknjas" <dave_doknjas@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
    news:3cf69b1c$1@10.1.10.29...
    >
    > The Classic VB Programmer:
    >
    > 1. Primarily focuses on the business problem at hand. Coding (including

    architecture
    > and design) is only secondary. Thinks about coding only to the extent that
    > it provides a solution to the business problem. Regards coding as a tool,
    > not as a way of life.


    VB.NET promotes abstraction of business concepts much more so than VB6. I
    agree that architecture and design are secondary in VB6, but that is exactly
    why VB.NET is a better tool for solving business problems. Unless maybe you
    are referring to quick-and-dirty ad hoc programs. But since you feel that
    architecture and design are not really that important, it's pretty clear
    where you're coming from.

    PS. Did you know that it is much easier to write a substantial program in
    ..NET than in old-style VB?

    > 2. Embraces as many black boxes as possible, provided that they are

    reliable
    > and supported.


    ..NET consists almost entirely of black boxes. .NET promotes black boxes
    more than VB6 ever has. It will lead to the development of more components
    than ever before because the deployment problems with COM don't exist
    anymore.

    > 3. Doesn't care whether the development methodology they are using is

    unsophisticated
    > or inconsistent with the methodology used by people who regard coding as
    > a way of life.


    Probably because you HAVE NO development methodology in the first place.
    Just hacking together the same solution, over and over again.

    > The VB.NET Programmer:
    >
    > 1. Regards coding as a way of life and takes pride in the complexity of

    their
    > code.


    IMO VB.NET, especially in ASP.NET, is much simpler and easier to follow.
    Just because it is new to you doesn't mean it is complex. .NET lets you
    code less. You can go home earlier, once you learn it.

    > 2. Would like to code as much as possible from scratch since they are

    insecure
    > in the knowledge that they would otherwise be relying on code which may be
    > more complex than their own.


    Are you joking? What do you think the 6500+ class libraries are for?

    > 3. Is insecure when reminded of what the "B" stands for in VB. To counter
    > this, they are determined to embrace every obfuscation used by others who
    > regard coding as a way of life.


    All I see are insecure VB6 programmers who are upset that all the
    workarounds and hacks that they've learned in the past are useless now.
    They believed that VB6 was a way of life, and that Microsoft owed them a
    language that never changed, so they would never have to learn anything new,
    and could continue to think of themselves as experts in something. Get over
    it.








  15. #15
    Zane Thomas Guest

    Re: The Classic VB Programmer vs the VB.NET Programmer

    On Fri, 31 May 2002 11:57:50 +1000, "Michael Culley" <mike@vbdotcom.com>
    wrote:

    >Where in the real world does indexing ever start at zero


    -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3

    The zero was a great discovery.


    --
    Turn on, tune in, download.
    zane@mvps.org

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