DevX Home    Today's Headlines   Articles Archive   Tip Bank   Forums   

Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst ... 456
Results 76 to 79 of 79
  1. #76
    Patrick Troughton Guest

    Re: VB6 vs VB.NET...Procedure Calling Syntax

    Dan Barclay <Dan@MVPs.org> wrote:
    >On 12 Aug 2002 16:44:55 -0700, "Patrick Troughton"
    ><Patrick@Troughton.com> wrote:
    >Right. In case you forgot, the issue you took up arms about was
    >whether this syntax was called a "statement' or not.

    That was your example, not mine. If you would have just admitted this in
    the beginning instead of being so evasive, we would saved each other about
    20 posts.

    >Prior to VB.Net (from the time they were introduced to the language
    >through VB6) they were consistent.

    I haven't really thought about this. My point was to compare/contrast the
    five procedure calling syntax rules (plus two special cases) of VB6 to the
    VB.NET's single rule. But to address your point about consistancy, I'm not
    sure that not having identical syntax for two different things (statements
    and procedures) is such a bad thing. They're not the exact same things, why
    should have the exact same syntax? In fact, could it not be argued that it
    makes things a little more clear? Now, it's easier to tell the difference.
    You could just look at the confusion in this thread alone to see that people
    are having trouble telling the difference.


  2. #77
    Patrick Troughton Guest

    Re: VB6 vs VB.NET...Procedure Calling Syntax

    I already took the parens around statements idea to it's logical absurdity....


    I know I said this before, but just to be clear, let me say it again...I
    do *not* think that requiring parens around all statements is a good idea.


    "Daniel Pratt" <dprREMOVETHISatt71@hotmail.com> wrote:
    > I was wondering when you would take this to its illogical conclusion.

  3. #78
    elliferg Guest

    Re: VB6 vs VB.NET...Procedure Calling Syntax

    kylix_is@yahoo.co.uk (Mike Mitchell) wrote:
    >On Mon, 12 Aug 2002 17:35:33 -0500, Dan Barclay <Dan@MVPs.org> wrote:
    >>Now, what do you think happens when you execute that Statement?
    >>Surprise! It executes a procedure!

    >Sorry, Dan, I don't this can be right. My information is that when a
    >"Statement" is executed, certain members of congress conjugate in an
    >anteroom off Bel-Aire Drive for coffee and muffins. There they speak
    >about world problems and, if not too drunk on their own
    >self-importance, come to conclusions which are then fed to a group of
    >warlords in Outer Mongolia via fax. We all know the provision of
    >horses there is really dire, and zebras, let alone donkeys, asses and
    >mules don't really gallop in quite the same way. It's this problem
    >which all "Statements" are endeavouring to fix - from the outside in,
    >or, failing that, from the inside out. Meanwhile, said members of
    >congress, now exhausted, are secretly returning to their desks and
    >normal business is resumed within just a matter of minutes.
    >Of course, I may be wrong about this, and statements could just be
    >calling procedures, as you suggest. But such a bizarre suggestion is
    >really difficult for some people to assimilate, which is why I thought
    >of the alternative, much more sensible, "zebra" problem paradigm.

    you forgot the omelettes.

  4. #79
    Daniel Pratt Guest

    Re: VB6 vs VB.NET...Procedure Calling Syntax

    "Patrick Troughton" <Patrick@Troughton.com> wrote in message
    > I already took the parens around statements idea to it's logical


    > I know I said this before, but just to be clear, let me say it again...I
    > do *not* think that requiring parens around all statements is a good idea.
    > /Pat

    Neither do I. My problem with AddHandler specifically is that I can see
    no significant semantic difference between it and any other method, built-in
    or otherwise. Certainly the first time I saw AddHandler in use I thought it
    was a method call and I was surprised not to see the parentheses.

    Some people have suggested that VB.NET is a C++ programmer's perfect
    vision of what VB should be. I, on the other hand, see a lot of VB6
    influence on VB.NET that goes beyond the basic (pun intended) shared syntax.
    Neither is afraid to hide a lot of "stuff" behind a keyword or two. Neither
    is afraid to come up with arbitrary syntax for certain circumstances.

    While such things can be good (programming languages are indended to
    simplify, after all), in many cases I think I would like to be more aware
    and more in control of what is going on. I do not want to pay the cost of
    things I don't want or need. I would tolerate more cryptic syntax if it was
    also more consistent, meaning that I had to keep less arbitrary rules in my
    head. For these reasons I am favoring C# over VB.NET right now (a fact I
    hate to admit in a VB.NET discussion group). This is all about balance, of
    course. Some other languages put you in control of details that I can see no
    great benefit to have control over (e.g. memory management), at least most
    of the time.

    Someday I'll design the perfect concept to machine code translater ;-)
    It will neither hinder nor complicate. It will be consistent but not
    cryptic. It will be easy but not arbitrary. In the mean time I'll be happy
    to see things improving :-)


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
Latest Articles
Questions? Contact us.
Web Development
Latest Tips
Open Source

   Development Centers

   -- Android Development Center
   -- Cloud Development Project Center
   -- HTML5 Development Center
   -- Windows Mobile Development Center

We have made updates to our Privacy Policy to reflect the implementation of the General Data Protection Regulation.