Re: App Object (fixes) - Page 3


DevX Home    Today's Headlines   Articles Archive   Tip Bank   Forums   

Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 130

Thread: Re: App Object (fixes)

  1. #31
    Dave Doknjas Guest

    Re: App Object (fixes)


    ps can you say "pointy haired boss"?

  2. #32
    Dave Doknjas Guest

    Re: App Object (fixes)


    >> So you've also given up?

    >
    >Well..you're not exactly making it easy are you? Rob went to some trouble

    to
    >show you how something could be done...and went as far as taking the time

    to
    >write the code for you...and you carry on...I doubt many people are feeling
    >particularly kindly disposed towards you.
    >
    >There are two types of moaning people can do here. One is moaning about

    some
    >lack of functionality in VB.NET, which you need but don't have. The missing
    >APP object probably falls into that...and Rob tried to help you out by
    >giving it to you.
    >


    One of the main points I've been trying to make is that I can't get excited
    about a development environment that forces me to either waste my own time
    or scavenge from the likes of Rob. I want this stuff built in! Sure, I can
    write it myself, but don't we want to write less code, not more??



  3. #33
    John Butler Guest

    Re: App Object (fixes)


    "Dave Doknjas" <dave_doknjas@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
    news:3cf7fa29$1@10.1.10.29...
    > Ask this programmer for an example the next time you see him. It looks

    like
    > VB.NET just might be the solution to all software development problems

    (and
    > perhaps other types of problems as well).


    You sarcasm is unnecessary.

    > Or.. perhaps it's just because you *CAN'T* break-edit-continue in VB.NET!


    Thanks for point that out...my point was entirely different...the code he
    was writing in VB.NET was better structured, thus he wasn't missing
    break-edit-continue, because he was making less mistakes...

    but really...don't worry about it...I was just sharing an anecdote...you
    ***** away...and I'll ignore you from now on...





  4. #34
    David Rothgery Guest

    Re: App Object (fixes)


    "Dave Doknjas" <dave_doknjas@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
    news:3cf80517$1@10.1.10.29...
    >
    > >Dave: Actually, I misspoke in my previous post. I meant to say, "VB6 apps
    > >*that need to be ported* will benefit from a substantial rewrite..." IMO,
    > >the vast majority of VB6 code can (and should) remain in VB6 for as long

    > as
    > >Windows is able to run 32-bit apps.
    > >---

    >
    > So who are you going to get to maintain those VB6 apps?


    I'd imagine you'd get them from the same kind of people who maintain COBOL
    apps today.


    --
    Dave Rothgery
    drothgery@alum.wpi.edu



  5. #35
    Zane Thomas Guest

    Re: App Object (fixes)

    On 31 May 2002 15:50:13 -0800, "Dave Doknjas" <dave_doknjas@yahoo.ca>
    wrote:

    >I've never used it much myself either, but what do you say about a boss who
    >brags that his employees don't need to do this anymore with VB.NET, when
    >they CAN'T.... LOL


    I'd say we're looking at a boss with a clue. There are better ways to
    code than the "try something out and see if it works" approach.


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

  6. #36
    John Butler Guest

    Re: App Object (fixes)


    "Dave Doknjas" <dave_doknjas@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
    news:3cf7fb9b$1@10.1.10.29...
    > I want this stuff built in!


    So, you're stamping your feet....what you want us to do about it? Cry along
    with you? I'm sure Version 2 will have more of the features you're looking
    for...or you're gonna have to find something else..or go back to VB6. You
    could try Delphi...but it isn't easier...




  7. #37
    Patrick Troughton Guest

    Re: App Object (fixes)


    kylix_is@yahoo.co.uk (Mike Mitchell) wrote:
    >
    >Hey, we could ask Borland to write VB.Net instead of Microsoft! Maybe
    >then they'd have retained backward compatibility!


    You could try, but even Borland supports the .NET initiative....

    http://www.borland.com/dotnet/

    /Pat

  8. #38
    Dave Doknjas Guest

    Re: App Object (fixes)


    zane@mabry.com (Zane Thomas) wrote:
    >On 31 May 2002 15:33:13 -0800, "Dave Doknjas" <dave_doknjas@yahoo.ca>
    >wrote:
    >
    >>Or.. perhaps it's just because you *CAN'T* break-edit-continue in VB.NET!

    >
    >Fwiw I've never used nor seen the need for such a "feature".
    >
    >

    I've never used it much myself either, but what do you say about a boss who
    brags that his employees don't need to do this anymore with VB.NET, when
    they CAN'T.... LOL


  9. #39
    Patrick Troughton Guest

    Re: App Object (fixes)


    "Dave Doknjas" <dave_doknjas@yahoo.ca> wrote:
    >
    >Exactly, that's why I've been hinting that those who don't care that VB.NET
    >is so incompatible with VB6 probably don't have serious apps that they've
    >also tried to convert. They have nothing at stake.


    This is one of the Great Myths of the Anti-.NET Cult and has been shot down
    many times before. My company probably has nearly a million lines of "classic"
    VB and ASP code and we fully support .NET. My advice has always been to use
    VB.NET for new development and keep VB6 for maintainance of existing apps.

    /Pat

  10. #40
    John Butler Guest

    Re: App Object (fixes)


    "Dave Doknjas" <dave_doknjas@yahoo.ca> wrote in message
    news:3cf806f2$1@10.1.10.29...
    >Your original post is there for all to see!


    Yes it is..and I sure hope others understood it the way I intended.





  11. #41
    Dave Doknjas Guest

    Re: App Object (fixes)


    >This is one of the Great Myths of the Anti-.NET Cult and has been shot down
    >many times before. My company probably has nearly a million lines of "classic"
    >VB and ASP code and we fully support .NET. My advice has always been to

    use
    >VB.NET for new development and keep VB6 for maintainance of existing apps.
    >
    >/Pat


    So you agree - it's a horrible nightmare to convert VB6 apps to VB.NET.
    If your company won't do it, then you also have nothing at stake.


  12. #42
    Patrick Troughton Guest

    Re: App Object (fixes)


    You're not alone in your experience. My company is similar. The biggest complaint
    is from the programmers stuck using VB6 because they want to use VB.NET.

    /Pat

    "John Butler" <nospamjrbutler@btinternet.com> wrote:
    >
    >Not just for you...
    >
    >As I've stated before, I now have my programmers *****ing whenever they

    have
    >to go back to VB6 to do something. Just three months into it, and they're
    >like that. One of my guys said to me yesterday that he felt he was writing
    >much better code. He said that with VB6, he would often be
    >break-edit-continue-fixing code two or three times before something worked,
    >but that now with VB.net, much of the time his code worked first time..I
    >thought that was quite an interesting comment.
    >
    >It's not scientific and certainly doesn't mean a whole lot...but an
    >interesting observation from a programmer who has no allegiance to
    >anything...just making a casual observation.
    >
    >rgds
    >John Butler
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >



  13. #43
    Patrick Troughton Guest

    Re: App Object (fixes)


    "Dave Doknjas" <dave_doknjas@yahoo.ca> wrote:
    >
    >Or.. perhaps it's just because you *CAN'T* break-edit-continue in VB.NET!
    >


    I think many of the .NOTters forget that this is version 1.0. Microsoft has
    stated that the next release will have edit-and-continue.

    /Pat



  14. #44
    Dave Doknjas Guest

    Re: App Object (fixes)


    > > So you agree - it's a horrible nightmare to convert
    > > VB6 apps to VB.NET.

    >
    >Dave: Given the current conversion tools, yes. I'd bet money that either

    MS
    >or third parties will provide better porting tools before long. And, as

    I've
    >pointed out elsewhere, most VB6 apps will benefit from a substantial rewrite
    >anyway, to take advantage of .NET's new capabilities.
    >---
    >Phil Weber
    >

    Phil, where have you been for the last year - companies aren't spending this
    kind of money now!


  15. #45
    Zane Thomas Guest

    Re: App Object (fixes)

    On 31 May 2002 16:25:58 -0800, "Dave Doknjas" <dave_doknjas@yahoo.ca>
    wrote:

    >Still LOL


    What chat room do you like to hang out in?


    --
    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