It's a jungle out there...


DevX Home    Today's Headlines   Articles Archive   Tip Bank   Forums   

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 37

Thread: It's a jungle out there...

  1. #1
    iGadget Guest

    It's a jungle out there...

    I've been looking back through the messages in here, and I'm amazed at the
    number of different mindsets and opinions on the benefits and lack thereof
    of VB.NET
    MM seems to spend all his time slagging of VB.NET and worrying that VB6
    might one day disappear, while Blob just trolls around, posting obnoxious
    comments for his own entertainments, but making sensible observations every
    now and then.
    We have Jason who has extreme opinions on the design flaws of VB6 and is
    obviously hoping the .NET will solve all those issues, being hounded by a
    herd of opposite extremists defending VB6, with his topic "Will VB.NET be
    more stable than VB6" managed to get 280 responses so far, including many
    very interesting ones relating to people opinions of OO principles and
    importance, and the correct location of certain functionality.
    It's great to see all these guys (many of whom are writers) on here
    discussing their opinions and findings.
    Absolutely fascinating

    Personally, I hate VB.NET for the following reasons:
    1) My lovely secure world in which I was a VB6 expert has been shattered,
    and I'm left in the situation where I know that if I decide to use VB.NET to
    do my next large project it will take 10 times as long, and I will have a
    plethora of new issues when I go to roll it out to customers.
    2) In the past I've found ways around issues such as lack of inheritance,
    most of which involved a 'bodge' of some sort, but now I have been given a
    true OO solution it means that I can resolve many those horrible VB6
    in-depth issues, but I also have to take this into consideration when coding
    the simplest tasks!
    3) The editor no longer has that nice 'edit it when it crashes and continue'
    function that made developer testing so quick and easy, and you can't even
    edit the source when the program is paused.
    4) The syntax has changed for so much of the language that I find I can
    write just as fluently (i.e. about 3 lines/hour) in either VB.NET or C#
    instead of my old 120lines/hour (or whatever it was) in VB6.

    But...
    I accept that the language has changed dramatically. I have always stated
    that VB receives a bad reputation compared to C++ because mediocre
    developers can write a good looking but buggy VB program relatively easily,
    while only a competent to strong developer would even attempt to write an
    application in C++. It is as difficult to code a well structured app in VB6
    as it is in VC++. All those VB6 gurus are no VB.NET newbies, with the
    thought of starting again so far down the ladder being terrifying.
    The language, and possibly even the underlying paradigm seems therefore to
    be largely irrelevant, with the skills of the designer playing the largest
    part in deciding not only whether a system will reach completion, but also
    whether it will be maintainable or extendable in the future. Even assembly
    language programs can be structured and robust.
    Interconnectivity between components plays an enormous part in these issues,
    and I suspect this has been well addresses by the .NET architecture.
    The takeup of .NET seems to be incredibly slow, but I put this down to the
    fact that 80-90% of VB developers have had no experience of how to use
    objects to their advantage, so this is really a kick in the teeth for them.
    ****, about 60-70% of VB6 developers don't even write their own classes! I
    can say from experience that having a reasonable amount of Java development
    experience makes the transition to .NET much much easier, and anyone
    claiming that the changover from VB6 to VB.NET is a simple language learning
    exercise is talking out of their nether-region.

    I'm sure other people have different opinions of these matters, and I'll be
    very interested to hear them.

    I'm off now to continue writing my 'hello world' app in VB.NET, and once
    find the reference in the hellishly large help file for the equivalent of a
    printf() function I will be able to start work coding this life-support
    machine controller...

    By the way, does anyone know what happened to the VB Snippet Addin that was
    mentioned in the 'Upgrading VB6 to .NET' book? That would save so much time
    in the transition period when looking for simple functions like the one
    above.

    Cheers,
    iGadget

    p.s. Blob, you won't find my details on the web because I value my privacy,
    but I've been using VB for ten years and I'm a self-employed consultant, a
    Comp.Sci. university lecturer teaching Java multimedia, DB engineering and
    Enterprise app development to Masters level, my eyes are brown, and I'm
    about the height of a tall troll (if a tall troll is about 5'9")



  2. #2
    Mike Mitchell Guest

    Re: It's a jungle out there...

    On Sun, 13 Oct 2002 23:08:03 +1000, "iGadget" <iGadget_@hotmail.com>
    wrote:

    >Personally, I hate VB.NET for the following reasons:


    Who cares about the reasons?!! You hate it. That's good enough for me!
    Let's hope it's good enough for His Billness, too. For there will, I
    am convinced of it, be many hundreds of thousands just like you in
    that big old world out there. It's time the Redmondians woke up to
    what they've done and started making plans to reintroduce "VB Classic"
    or whatever high-falutin' name they want to give it in order to save
    face. I don't care how much crow they have to eat, but just maybe, if
    they did that, they would send a message to VB devs everywhere to say,
    hey, sorry guys! We f***ed up. It happens. Now this is what we're
    gonna do...

    MM

  3. #3
    Constance J. Petersen Guest

    Re: It's a jungle out there...

    Hi iGadget,

    "iGadget" <iGadget_@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:3da969dc$1@10.1.10.29...
    > can say from experience that having a reasonable amount of Java development
    > experience makes the transition to .NET much much easier, and anyone
    > claiming that the changover from VB6 to VB.NET is a simple language learning
    > exercise is talking out of their nether-region.


    Few would argue that it's not a significant change for experienced VB6
    developers.

    If you haven't done so already, reading two or three good books on VB.NET will
    help immensely with the transition. I have recommendations, if you'd like them.
    But I've posted them here in the past, so I expect you've already seen them.

    --
    Constance Petersen, DevX newsgroup section leader
    Build a great Web site: http://www.smartisans.com/
    New ASP.NET book: "Programming the Web with Visual Basic .NET"
    http://amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1...tancepeterseA/
    --
    Please reply in the newsgroup so everyone can benefit



  4. #4
    iGadget Guest

    Re: It's a jungle out there...

    Hi,

    > Few would argue that it's not a significant change for experienced VB6
    > developers.


    > If you haven't done so already, reading two or three good books on VB.NET

    will
    > help immensely with the transition. I have recommendations, if you'd like

    them.
    > But I've posted them here in the past, so I expect you've already seen

    them.


    I have and I am. I've read several books on the language and (probably the
    most relevant to me) the upgrading process, but please repost the ones you
    recommend too (I've not been in this newsgroup long) and I'll check them
    out.
    I'm not against .NET at all, I simply find it daunting

    Cheers,
    iGadget



  5. #5
    iGadget Guest

    Re: It's a jungle out there...

    "Mike Mitchell" <kylix_is@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
    news:hm5jquoo1s6m80cpdmh744q2m5r17hu04f@4ax.com...
    > >Personally, I hate VB.NET for the following reasons:

    >
    > Who cares about the reasons?!! You hate it. That's good enough for me!
    > Let's hope it's good enough for His Billness, too. For there will, I
    > am convinced of it, be many hundreds of thousands just like you in
    > that big old world out there. It's time the Redmondians woke up to
    > what they've done and started making plans to reintroduce "VB Classic"
    > or whatever high-falutin' name they want to give it in order to save
    > face. I don't care how much crow they have to eat, but just maybe, if
    > they did that, they would send a message to VB devs everywhere to say,
    > hey, sorry guys! We f***ed up. It happens. Now this is what we're
    > gonna do...


    Hmm.. I think you are missing my point here. People hate anything that
    makes them uncomfortable, and several of my true hates in VS.NET could (and
    might) be resolved in v2.
    I sympathise with your feelings towards VB.NET (Jeez, I sound like a
    shrink!), but I suspect that the move is one for the best. It may even
    improve the development world as many very weak programmers are driven out
    or retrained to provide more structured and reliable systems (dangerous talk
    here).
    I would love it if VB Classic was maintained, but the third party vendors
    will not allow this! They have now shifted all their efforts over to
    creating .NET products and are very very unlikely to continue OCX
    developments, leaving VB6 developers in the lurch with respect to support
    and upgrades.
    I think it's time for us VB6 veterans to "move on", and accept that the new
    upcoming developers out there _will_ use .NET and _will_ start taking over
    our roles if we don't accept the situation.

    Cheers,
    iGadget

    p.s. Does anyone have any idea about the VB Snippet addin I mentioned?



  6. #6
    Jason Guest

    Re: It's a jungle out there...


    "iGadget" <iGadget_@hotmail.com> wrote:

    >I would love it if VB Classic was maintained, but the third party vendors
    >will not allow this! They have now shifted all their efforts over to
    >creating .NET products and are very very unlikely to continue OCX
    >developments, leaving VB6 developers in the lurch with respect to support
    >and upgrades.


    Not necessarily true. Take Component One for instance. They have acquired
    a number of tools for VB from different vendors, and are offering them in
    a single subscription package. Maintainance included.

    VB6 is a mature product. It has a fairly mature feature set, and lots of
    legacy code that can't easily be ported because it does not architecturally
    fit the .NET architecture. There are products out there that rely heavily
    on VB to allow them to be customized. Nope, VB6 isn't going away any time
    soon. I still use it regularly, and I will be doing some development with
    it tomorrow, as a matter of fact.

    My beef with VB6 is that there are better technologies and better methodologies
    available, and it hurts to do new development in VB6. You and I both know
    all the workarounds, tips, and tricks ever thunk up for VB6, right? All
    the different tricks you can use to shoehorn different architectures into
    VB6? Well, my point is that you shouldn't have to use a shoehorn.

    ******************************

    For instance, if you need to have dynamically loadable MDI child forms, you
    should not have to write ActiveX controls and then load them into a stock
    MDI child.

    Managing menus ought to be easy, and VB6's menu model (which dates back to
    VB3 with surprisingly little change) is very difficult for complex menus.


    Jeesh, at the very least you'd think they would have written collections
    so that you could create one of your own without resorting to hacks from
    "Hardcore...".

    And you'd think that Microsoft would have a decent sockets wrapper for VB6
    by now, but I had to go straight to Winsock to get what I needed.

    And VB6's events were a GREAT addition to the language, but you can't put
    them on an Interface.

    And Friend functions - another great idea with a bad implementation. Did
    you know that friend functions are visible from JavaScript when you use VB6
    components? Some encapsulation that is! But the big pain is that Friend
    functions aren't available polymorphically, which limits there usefulness.

    Enough of that.

    VB6 has lots more technical issues than this. If Microsoft did not do something
    about it, eventually someone else would. Java is way ahead of VB6 for server-side
    programming, but it was never able to best VB in client-side programming.
    Still, it was only a matter of time before Sun turned its focus back to
    the client.

    If that happened without an answer from Microsoft, then they would deserve
    what they got.

    **************************************

    By the way, I miss "code and continue" too. I hope Microsoft will get it
    working by the next release of Visual Studio.

    Also, I am not a huge fan of VB.NET. I prefer C#, which is a much cleaner
    language. I grew up on C and BASIC, so either syntax is good for me. But
    I don't like all the compatibility functions that muddy up VB.NET. That
    just means you have to remember two ways to do everything.


  7. #7
    Tom Shelton Guest

    Re: It's a jungle out there...



    > By the way, I miss "code and continue" too. I hope Microsoft will get it
    > working by the next release of Visual Studio.


    I don't care if it never comes back... I know this maybe somewhat of a
    contrary point of veiw, but I never really found it that usefull. To each
    his own I guess.

    > Also, I am not a huge fan of VB.NET. I prefer C#, which is a much cleaner
    > language. I grew up on C and BASIC, so either syntax is good for me. But
    > I don't like all the compatibility functions that muddy up VB.NET. That
    > just means you have to remember two ways to do everything.


    I also prefere C#. But when I do need to use VB.NET, I remove the reference
    to Microsoft.VisualBasic so that I'm not tempted to use the VB.NET
    functions - makes it even closer to my C# code! He, he!

    Tom Shelton



  8. #8
    David A. Rothgery Guest

    Re: It's a jungle out there...

    Tom Shelton <tom@mtogden.com> wrote:
    >
    >
    > > By the way, I miss "code and continue" too. I hope Microsoft will get it
    > > working by the next release of Visual Studio.

    >
    > I don't care if it never comes back... I know this maybe somewhat of a
    > contrary point of veiw, but I never really found it that usefull. To each
    > his own I guess.
    >
    > > Also, I am not a huge fan of VB.NET. I prefer C#, which is a much cleaner
    > > language. I grew up on C and BASIC, so either syntax is good for me. But
    > > I don't like all the compatibility functions that muddy up VB.NET. That
    > > just means you have to remember two ways to do everything.

    >
    > I also prefere C#. But when I do need to use VB.NET, I remove the reference
    > to Microsoft.VisualBasic so that I'm not tempted to use the VB.NET
    > functions - makes it even closer to my C# code! He, he!


    I'll continue to be boggled by this. It's one thing to stay away from
    the compatibility namespace, but avoiding core VB functions seems silly,
    especially when there aren't easy alternative ways to do the same thing.

    --
    Dave Rothgery
    Picking nits since 1976
    drothgery@alum.wpi.edu
    http://drothgery.editthispage.com

  9. #9
    Tom Shelton Guest

    Re: It's a jungle out there...


    "David A. Rothgery" <drothgery@alum.wpi.edu> wrote in message
    news:MPG.1813f6cb69b5ff1f98973d@news.devx.com...
    > Tom Shelton <tom@mtogden.com> wrote:
    > >
    > >
    > > > By the way, I miss "code and continue" too. I hope Microsoft will get

    it
    > > > working by the next release of Visual Studio.

    > >
    > > I don't care if it never comes back... I know this maybe somewhat of a
    > > contrary point of veiw, but I never really found it that usefull. To

    each
    > > his own I guess.
    > >
    > > > Also, I am not a huge fan of VB.NET. I prefer C#, which is a much

    cleaner
    > > > language. I grew up on C and BASIC, so either syntax is good for me.

    But
    > > > I don't like all the compatibility functions that muddy up VB.NET.

    That
    > > > just means you have to remember two ways to do everything.

    > >
    > > I also prefere C#. But when I do need to use VB.NET, I remove the

    reference
    > > to Microsoft.VisualBasic so that I'm not tempted to use the VB.NET
    > > functions - makes it even closer to my C# code! He, he!

    >
    > I'll continue to be boggled by this. It's one thing to stay away from
    > the compatibility namespace, but avoiding core VB functions seems silly,
    > especially when there aren't easy alternative ways to do the same thing.


    About the only thing in the VB namespaces that I can't accomplish with the
    framework are the financial functions, and I don't use those anyway... The
    fact is that even if the VB runtime provides an "easier" solution (which I
    really don't think it does for to many things), there is often a performance
    penelty for using that functionality - especially things like file I/O.

    The real truth is that A) I hardly ever use VB anymore, and when I do it's
    VB5 or VB6, and B) I got into the habbit of doing this when I was learnig
    VB.NET to force me to learn the framework.

    Tom Shelton



  10. #10
    Mike Mitchell Guest

    Re: It's a jungle out there...

    On 13 Oct 2002 19:33:15 -0700, "Jason" <jason@hotmail.com> wrote:

    > Well, my point is that you shouldn't have to use a shoehorn.


    Hey, shoehorns are made for a reason! The only other choice you've got
    is to deliberately order one size bigger. Fine in the shop, but sloppy
    all the way home.

    MM

  11. #11
    Mike Mitchell Guest

    Re: It's a jungle out there...

    On Sun, 13 Oct 2002 22:32:29 -0700, David A. Rothgery
    <drothgery@alum.wpi.edu> wrote:

    >I'll continue to be boggled by this. It's one thing to stay away from
    >the compatibility namespace, but avoiding core VB functions seems silly,
    >especially when there aren't easy alternative ways to do the same thing.


    Yep. The core VB functions are often the easiest!

    MM

  12. #12
    iGadget Guest

    Re: It's a jungle out there...

    "Jason" <jason@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:3daa2ceb$1@10.1.10.29...
    >
    > "iGadget" <iGadget_@hotmail.com> wrote:
    >
    > >I would love it if VB Classic was maintained, but the third party vendors
    > >will not allow this! They have now shifted all their efforts over to
    > >creating .NET products and are very very unlikely to continue OCX
    > >developments, leaving VB6 developers in the lurch with respect to support
    > >and upgrades.

    >
    > Not necessarily true. Take Component One for instance. They have

    acquired
    > a number of tools for VB from different vendors, and are offering them in
    > a single subscription package. Maintainance included.


    Yeeees.... but will they include any new products? How many more versions of
    ActiveReports will be released for VB6? They are already releasing
    ActiveReports.NET, and they are very unlikely to employ twice as many
    developers or run two development streams in the future.
    Companies like Component One may well 'mop up' the old products from other
    companies while the market for legacy control remains alive. Sensible, but
    will we still want 'Widget2001.OCX' in 2005, or will we expect similar
    functionality to that provided by 'Widget.NET 2005'?
    Go back and try writing something with Mabry FlexGrid v.1

    > VB6 is a mature product. It has a fairly mature feature set, and lots of
    > legacy code that can't easily be ported because it does not

    architecturally
    > fit the .NET architecture. There are products out there that rely heavily
    > on VB to allow them to be customized. Nope, VB6 isn't going away any time
    > soon. I still use it regularly, and I will be doing some development with
    > it tomorrow, as a matter of fact.


    Definately. VB6 is heavily entrenched, and I don't argue against this at
    all. I'm saying that support and demand will dwindle, in the same way that
    DOS app support dwindled when Windows was released. Many people still love
    DOS, and apps are still written for it. The developer of VET antivirus swore
    he would never release a Windows version, but it's no longer mainstream, and
    at the end of the day it's the customer that we have to please. Many
    companies now ask for things to be done in .NET even though they know
    nothing about it, and I sometimes have to argue them back to VB6 so that I
    can give them more reasonable timescales and costs

    > My beef with VB6 is that there are better technologies and better

    methodologies
    > available, and it hurts to do new development in VB6. You and I both know
    > all the workarounds, tips, and tricks ever thunk up for VB6, right? All
    > the different tricks you can use to shoehorn different architectures into
    > VB6? Well, my point is that you shouldn't have to use a shoehorn.
    >
    > ******************************
    >
    > For instance, if you need to have dynamically loadable MDI child forms,

    you
    > should not have to write ActiveX controls and then load them into a stock
    > MDI child.
    >
    > Managing menus ought to be easy, and VB6's menu model (which dates back to
    > VB3 with surprisingly little change) is very difficult for complex menus.
    >
    >
    > Jeesh, at the very least you'd think they would have written collections
    > so that you could create one of your own without resorting to hacks from
    > "Hardcore...".
    >
    > And you'd think that Microsoft would have a decent sockets wrapper for VB6
    > by now, but I had to go straight to Winsock to get what I needed.
    >
    > And VB6's events were a GREAT addition to the language, but you can't put
    > them on an Interface.
    >
    > And Friend functions - another great idea with a bad implementation. Did
    > you know that friend functions are visible from JavaScript when you use

    VB6
    > components? Some encapsulation that is! But the big pain is that Friend
    > functions aren't available polymorphically, which limits there usefulness.
    >
    > Enough of that.
    >
    > VB6 has lots more technical issues than this. If Microsoft did not do

    something
    > about it, eventually someone else would. Java is way ahead of VB6 for

    server-side
    > programming, but it was never able to best VB in client-side programming.
    > Still, it was only a matter of time before Sun turned its focus back to
    > the client.


    This is a key one!!! This is my point in releation to .NET. There are such
    massive similarities between Java and .NET languages that almost all of the
    benefits of Java are now available in this product, except of course
    cross-platform compatibility (and this doesn't worry any of my clients).
    My wife was given a copy of Sun 'Star Office' suite because the local church
    didn't want to splash out on MS Office Pro for her job as secretary. Have
    you used it? The thought of Sun writing something of that calibre for me to
    develop applications for financial organisations (which is what most of my
    work is) instills in me a sense of abject horror!

    > If that happened without an answer from Microsoft, then they would deserve
    > what they got.
    >
    > **************************************
    >
    > By the way, I miss "code and continue" too. I hope Microsoft will get it
    > working by the next release of Visual Studio.
    >
    > Also, I am not a huge fan of VB.NET. I prefer C#, which is a much cleaner
    > language. I grew up on C and BASIC, so either syntax is good for me. But
    > I don't like all the compatibility functions that muddy up VB.NET. That
    > just means you have to remember two ways to do everything.


    This is interesting. I have come to the same conclusion, and the only
    noticable advantage I see in VB.NET is that you don't have to watch the case
    you type in
    Doing things like having to specify ReadOnly on a property that only has a
    Get sections seems odd, and is not in C#. Is this a stupidity detector to
    tell you that you've forgotten a Let? I also prefer the more logical syntax
    of adding events to handlers in C#, unlike the rather odd method in VB.NET.

    Cheers,
    iGadget



  13. #13
    Mike Mitchell Guest

    Re: It's a jungle out there...

    On Sun, 13 Oct 2002 13:05:52 -0400, "Constance J. Petersen"
    <constance@smartisans.com> wrote:

    >If you haven't done so already, reading two or three good books on VB.NET will
    >help immensely with the transition. I have recommendations, if you'd like them.
    >But I've posted them here in the past, so I expect you've already seen them.


    I think that all the VB.Net books I've perused do without exception
    denigrate classic VB and praise VB.Net to the heavens, and those are
    just not the kinds of books I'm going to pay money for. What? I'd pay
    money to a guy who keeps calling my mom ugly?!! This is the Dubya
    school of thought, where classic VB is on a par with the Axis of Evil.
    No, what I could be interested in is a book written by a VB.Netter,
    who started out being 100% opposed, but is being forced by work
    requirements or career requirements to "get into it". Thus,
    reluctantly, he (may be a she) learns how to use it and can see some
    of the benefits. If such benefits there be, that would be the kind of
    person who could sell them to non-believers like me.

    But of all the VB.Net books in my favourite bookstore not one of them
    fires me up with an urge to actually walk to the till and pull out my
    credit card. I'd rather spend the money on a new pair of shoes and get
    to play with that shoehorn again! And the young assistant who helps me
    slip it in is incredibly pretty. My most recent purchase was "MySQL
    Weekend Crash Course".

    MM

  14. #14
    Constance J. Petersen Guest

    Re: It's a jungle out there...

    Hi iGadget,

    "iGadget" <iGadget_@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:3daa13ca@10.1.10.29...
    > I have and I am. I've read several books on the language and (probably the
    > most relevant to me) the upgrading process, but please repost the ones you
    > recommend too (I've not been in this newsgroup long) and I'll check them
    > out.
    > I'm not against .NET at all, I simply find it daunting


    I recommend "Moving to VB.NET: Strategies, Concepts, and Code" by Dan Appleman.
    It will tell you what you need to know to move from VB5 or VB 6 to Visual Basic
    ..NET.

    http://amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1...tancepeterseA/

    With its emphasis on object-oriented programming, "Programming VB.NET: A Guide
    for Experienced Programmers" by Gary Cornell, is also excellent.

    http://amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1...tancepeterseA/

    After you're comfortable with VB.NET programming, if you also want to learn to
    program ASP.NET with VB, I highly recommend (what can I say -- I'm biased <g>)
    the book I co-authored: "Programming the Web with Visual Basic .NET", which you
    can preview (toc, index, and complete sample chapter) from this page of our Web
    site:

    http://www.smartisans.com/pwebvbnet/preview.aspx .

    --
    Constance Petersen, DevX newsgroup section leader
    Build a great Web site: http://www.smartisans.com/
    New ASP.NET book: "Programming the Web with Visual Basic .NET"
    http://amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1...tancepeterseA/
    --
    Please reply in the newsgroup so everyone can benefit



  15. #15
    Phil Weber Guest

    Re: It's a jungle out there...

    > I recommend "Moving to VB.NET: Strategies, Concepts, and Code"...
    > "Programming VB.NET: A Guide for Experienced Programmers"...
    > "Programming the Web with Visual Basic .NET"


    Constance: Can you recommend any books that aren't published by APress? ;-)
    --
    Phil Weber



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