Hopeless...


DevX Home    Today's Headlines   Articles Archive   Tip Bank   Forums   

Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Hopeless...

  1. #1
    Rick Buda Guest

    Hopeless...


    .NET is all about C#. If you still want to use VB - and worse yet, if you
    want to use VB in its current form - then you might as well stick with VB6
    - VARIANTs, IDispatch, binary compatability, 1-based arrays, -1 True values,
    "Dim" statements, and all the other wonderful things that VB6 did wrong.


  2. #2
    Patrick Steele Guest

    Re: Hopeless...

    In article <3ad5a533$1@news.devx.com> (from Rick Buda
    <rbuda@mediaone.net>),
    > ... "Dim" statements, and all the other wonderful things that VB6 did wrong.


    Ok, I gotta ask:

    What's wrong with the "Dim" statement?

    --
    Patrick Steele
    (psteele@ipdsolution.com)
    Lead Software Architect
    Image Process Design

  3. #3
    Ed Courtenay Guest

    Re: Hopeless...


    The most glaringly obvious thing that VB6 got wrong with Dim, VB.Net has now
    got right:

    Dim i As Integer = 10

    I've personally been waiting for that one for years....

    "Patrick Steele" <psteele@ipdsolution.com_> wrote in message
    news:MPG.153f7723ab2536d7989766@news.devx.com...
    > In article <3ad5a533$1@news.devx.com> (from Rick Buda
    > <rbuda@mediaone.net>),
    > > ... "Dim" statements, and all the other wonderful things that VB6 did

    wrong.
    >
    > Ok, I gotta ask:
    >
    > What's wrong with the "Dim" statement?
    >
    > --
    > Patrick Steele
    > (psteele@ipdsolution.com)
    > Lead Software Architect
    > Image Process Design




  4. #4
    Patrick Steele Guest

    Re: Hopeless...

    In article <3ad5c3c8$1@news.devx.com> (from Ed Courtenay
    <ed@edcourtenay.co.uk>),
    >
    > The most glaringly obvious thing that VB6 got wrong with Dim, VB.Net has now
    > got right:
    >
    > Dim i As Integer = 10
    >
    > I've personally been waiting for that one for years....


    Oh, okay. The way Rick put it in quotes ("Dim") I thought he had some
    problem with the keyword "Dim". Who knows...

    And yes -- I really like the ability to initialize variables when
    creating them!

    --
    Patrick Steele
    (psteele@ipdsolution.com)
    Lead Software Architect
    Image Process Design

  5. #5
    Jonathan Allen Guest

    Re: Hopeless...

    I think "Local" would be a better word than "Dim" considering how we use it,
    but it is still a lot better than that reverse notation nonsense. We are not
    casting spells for crying out loud.

    --
    Jonathan Allen


    "Patrick Steele" <psteele@ipdsolution.com_> wrote in message
    news:MPG.153f7723ab2536d7989766@news.devx.com...
    > In article <3ad5a533$1@news.devx.com> (from Rick Buda
    > <rbuda@mediaone.net>),
    > > ... "Dim" statements, and all the other wonderful things that VB6 did

    wrong.
    >
    > Ok, I gotta ask:
    >
    > What's wrong with the "Dim" statement?
    >
    > --
    > Patrick Steele
    > (psteele@ipdsolution.com)
    > Lead Software Architect
    > Image Process Design




  6. #6
    Rick Buda Guest

    Re: Hopeless...


    What would you rather write:

    Dim i As Integer = 0
    or
    int i = 0;

    The second statement is one-half the length of the first, and I don't like
    typing.

    Patrick Steele <psteele@ipdsolution.com_> wrote:
    >In article <3ad5c3c8$1@news.devx.com> (from Ed Courtenay
    ><ed@edcourtenay.co.uk>),
    >>
    >> The most glaringly obvious thing that VB6 got wrong with Dim, VB.Net has

    now
    >> got right:
    >>
    >> Dim i As Integer = 10
    >>
    >> I've personally been waiting for that one for years....

    >
    >Oh, okay. The way Rick put it in quotes ("Dim") I thought he had some
    >problem with the keyword "Dim". Who knows...
    >
    >And yes -- I really like the ability to initialize variables when
    >creating them!
    >
    >--
    >Patrick Steele
    >(psteele@ipdsolution.com)
    >Lead Software Architect
    >Image Process Design



  7. #7
    Jonathan Allen Guest

    Re: Hopeless...

    > The second statement is one-half the length of the first, and I don't like
    > typing.



    But what if it is an object?

    Dim X As New MyClass(1)
    MyClass X = new MyClass(1)

    Is it just me, or does it seem silly to begin and end the line with the type
    name. One would think the compiler is smart enough to assume I wanted the
    same type if I didn't specify otherwise.

    When you include access modifiers, the difference is even more evident...

    Private X As New MyClass(1)
    private MyClass X = New MyClass(2)


    --
    Jonathan Allen


    "Rick Buda" <rbuda@mediaone.net> wrote in message
    news:3ad62da3$1@news.devx.com...
    >
    > What would you rather write:
    >
    > Dim i As Integer = 0
    > or
    > int i = 0;
    >
    > The second statement is one-half the length of the first, and I don't like
    > typing.
    >
    > Patrick Steele <psteele@ipdsolution.com_> wrote:
    > >In article <3ad5c3c8$1@news.devx.com> (from Ed Courtenay
    > ><ed@edcourtenay.co.uk>),
    > >>
    > >> The most glaringly obvious thing that VB6 got wrong with Dim, VB.Net

    has
    > now
    > >> got right:
    > >>
    > >> Dim i As Integer = 10
    > >>
    > >> I've personally been waiting for that one for years....

    > >
    > >Oh, okay. The way Rick put it in quotes ("Dim") I thought he had some
    > >problem with the keyword "Dim". Who knows...
    > >
    > >And yes -- I really like the ability to initialize variables when
    > >creating them!
    > >
    > >--
    > >Patrick Steele
    > >(psteele@ipdsolution.com)
    > >Lead Software Architect
    > >Image Process Design

    >




  8. #8
    Sjoerd Verweij Guest

    Re: Hopeless...

    > What would you rather write:
    >
    > Dim i As Integer = 0
    > or
    > int i = 0;
    >
    > The second statement is one-half the length of the first, and I don't like
    > typing.


    Actually, I find myself automatically typing

    Dim X As DockableBarItem = New DockableBarItem()

    Maybe it's my subconscious sending me a message? :-)



  9. #9
    Patrick Troughton Guest

    Re: Hopeless...


    Just wait till you end up typing AndElse and OrAlso for the next 10 years...

    /Pat

    "Rick Buda" <rbuda@mediaone.net> wrote:
    >
    >What would you rather write:
    >
    >Dim i As Integer = 0
    >or
    >int i = 0;
    >
    >The second statement is one-half the length of the first, and I don't like
    >typing.
    >
    >Patrick Steele <psteele@ipdsolution.com_> wrote:
    >>In article <3ad5c3c8$1@news.devx.com> (from Ed Courtenay
    >><ed@edcourtenay.co.uk>),
    >>>
    >>> The most glaringly obvious thing that VB6 got wrong with Dim, VB.Net

    has
    >now
    >>> got right:
    >>>
    >>> Dim i As Integer = 10
    >>>
    >>> I've personally been waiting for that one for years....

    >>
    >>Oh, okay. The way Rick put it in quotes ("Dim") I thought he had some


    >>problem with the keyword "Dim". Who knows...
    >>
    >>And yes -- I really like the ability to initialize variables when
    >>creating them!
    >>
    >>--
    >>Patrick Steele
    >>(psteele@ipdsolution.com)
    >>Lead Software Architect
    >>Image Process Design

    >



  10. #10
    Jeff Pipes Guest

    Re: Hopeless...


    Now that Microsoft is ruining VB with these rollbacks what makes you think
    VB will even be around 10 years from now?

    -Jeff

    "Patrick Troughton" <Patrick@Troughton.com> wrote:
    >
    >Just wait till you end up typing AndElse and OrAlso for the next 10 years...
    >
    >/Pat
    >
    >"Rick Buda" <rbuda@mediaone.net> wrote:
    >>
    >>What would you rather write:
    >>
    >>Dim i As Integer = 0
    >>or
    >>int i = 0;
    >>
    >>The second statement is one-half the length of the first, and I don't like
    >>typing.
    >>
    >>Patrick Steele <psteele@ipdsolution.com_> wrote:
    >>>In article <3ad5c3c8$1@news.devx.com> (from Ed Courtenay
    >>><ed@edcourtenay.co.uk>),
    >>>>
    >>>> The most glaringly obvious thing that VB6 got wrong with Dim, VB.Net

    >has
    >>now
    >>>> got right:
    >>>>
    >>>> Dim i As Integer = 10
    >>>>
    >>>> I've personally been waiting for that one for years....
    >>>
    >>>Oh, okay. The way Rick put it in quotes ("Dim") I thought he had some

    >
    >>>problem with the keyword "Dim". Who knows...
    >>>
    >>>And yes -- I really like the ability to initialize variables when
    >>>creating them!
    >>>
    >>>--
    >>>Patrick Steele
    >>>(psteele@ipdsolution.com)
    >>>Lead Software Architect
    >>>Image Process Design

    >>

    >



  11. #11
    Patrick Troughton Guest

    Re: Hopeless...


    Hi Jeff,

    You're right, there's no telling how long VB will last. I guess we'll have
    to wait and see what other improvements they're going to take away from us....

    /Pat

    "Jeff Pipes" <JeffP622@msn.com> wrote:
    >
    >Now that Microsoft is ruining VB with these rollbacks what makes you think
    >VB will even be around 10 years from now?
    >
    >-Jeff
    >
    >"Patrick Troughton" <Patrick@Troughton.com> wrote:
    >>
    >>Just wait till you end up typing AndElse and OrAlso for the next 10 years...
    >>
    >>/Pat



  12. #12
    Rick Buda Guest

    Re: Hopeless...


    What is up with that? That's almost as bad as:

    If Not myObject Is Nothing Then DoSomethingWithMyObject(myObject)

    "Patrick Troughton" <Patrick@Troughton.com> wrote:
    >
    >Just wait till you end up typing AndElse and OrAlso for the next 10 years...
    >
    >/Pat



  13. #13
    Patrick Steele Guest

    Re: Hopeless...

    In article <3ad62da3$1@news.devx.com> (from Rick Buda
    <rbuda@mediaone.net>),
    > The second statement is one-half the length of the first, and I don't like
    > typing.


    Then use a language like C/C++/C#.

    --
    Patrick Steele
    (psteele@ipdsolution.com)
    Lead Software Architect
    Image Process Design

  14. #14
    Larry Linson Guest

    Re: Hopeless...


    "Rick Buda" <rbuda@mediaone.net> wrote:
    >
    >.NET is all about C#. If you still want to use VB - and worse yet, if

    you
    >want to use VB in its current form - then you might as well stick with

    VB6
    >- VARIANTs, IDispatch, binary compatability, 1-based arrays, -1 True values,
    >"Dim" statements, and all the other wonderful things that VB6 did wrong.


    I drop in here once in a while and skim through a few weeks of posts. This
    time, I'm amazed at the apparent concensus that so many things were wrong
    with VB through VB6. I'm wondering if you are talking about the same VB,
    the one that is undeniably the most popular development tool of all time.


    I really cannot bring myself to believe that was solely due to the Mighty
    Microsoft Marketing Machine (MMMM) being able to force down millions of throats
    a product with so many things wrong with it. I really find no way to avoid
    believing that there must have been many things right with it, or not even
    the MMMM nor IBM in its heyday could have sold that many copies.

    Reading these posts, I come to the conclusion that the really amazing thing
    is that I was, and uncounted thousands of my fellow programmers and developers,
    were somehow able to struggle along in this business since its inception,
    using language after language and tool after tool that lacked all these vital
    necessities (the ones that people have just in the past very few years realized
    we couldn't compute without). I guess all those programs that I remember,
    the ones that kept the world running more or less smoothly, the ones without
    a single object anywhere, must just be the products of an aging memory, not
    historical fact as they seem.

  15. #15
    David A. Rothgery Guest

    Re: Hopeless...

    Larry Linson <larry.linson@ntpcug.org> wrote:

    > Reading these posts, I come to the conclusion that the really amazing
    > thing is that I was, and uncounted thousands of my fellow programmers
    > and developers, were somehow able to struggle along in this business
    > since its inception, using language after language and tool after tool
    > that lacked all these vital necessities (the ones that people have just
    > in the past very few years realized we couldn't compute without). I
    > guess all those programs that I remember, the ones that kept the world
    > running more or less smoothly, the ones without a single object
    > anywhere, must just be the products of an aging memory, not
    > historical fact as they seem.


    To get the very good VB IDE, a lot of programmers have always been
    willing to deal with some of the deficiencies of the VB language. This
    isn't saying that 'classic VB' didn't have lot of good points. It's just
    that there were a few things that were a bit strange, and the support
    for OOP was limited.

    --
    Dave Rothgery
    Picking nits since 1976
    drothgery@myrealbox.com
    http://drothgery.editthispage.com

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