VB.NET news?
-
I get emails from .NET insight and today there was a link for the VB.NET developers: http://www.ftponline.com/vsm/2006_07/magazine/columns/desktopdeveloper/[^] So to all you VB developers out there, youd better learn that, its hot stuff :P ...well, enough with the mockery, I found it pretty funny that they had an article about why loops are good.
"I'll also walk you through how to use the powerful Do... Loop" Words fail me. Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog
-
I get emails from .NET insight and today there was a link for the VB.NET developers: http://www.ftponline.com/vsm/2006_07/magazine/columns/desktopdeveloper/[^] So to all you VB developers out there, youd better learn that, its hot stuff :P ...well, enough with the mockery, I found it pretty funny that they had an article about why loops are good.
About this mockery, <rantmode> Frankly I don't get the whole point, I being both a fanatic C# and VB.NET developer (VB.NET is for work), have totally no problems with the latter. In fact, I even tend to develop faster in VB.NET (the code completion in VS2005 is much more automated than in C#, plus the {} keys are somewhat akward on my keyboard layout). Under the hood, there is no differences at all (granted, both C# and VB.NET have some quircks and other stuff that are different or not supported, e.g. anonymous methods in C# or optional parameters in VB.NET). But all in all there isn't that much of a difference. I'd like to end with one of my all-time favourite Homer (Simpson that is)-quotes: "red M&M's or blue M&M's: they all wind up the same color in the end." Kinda like both C# and VB.NET wind up as IL :-D:-> </rantmode>
-
Amazing!! :laugh: I guess the next big thing is they would be able to do addition (and substraction!) in VB.NET4 ? perhaps? Or is it too much to dream for? ;P
Super Lloyd wrote:
(and substraction!) in VB.NET4 ? perhaps?
Maybe they can add a spelling and grammer checker for C developers next. ;P I'm just teasing by the way...
Capital Punishment means never having to say "you again?" As easy as 3.141592653589793238462643383279502884197169
-
About this mockery, <rantmode> Frankly I don't get the whole point, I being both a fanatic C# and VB.NET developer (VB.NET is for work), have totally no problems with the latter. In fact, I even tend to develop faster in VB.NET (the code completion in VS2005 is much more automated than in C#, plus the {} keys are somewhat akward on my keyboard layout). Under the hood, there is no differences at all (granted, both C# and VB.NET have some quircks and other stuff that are different or not supported, e.g. anonymous methods in C# or optional parameters in VB.NET). But all in all there isn't that much of a difference. I'd like to end with one of my all-time favourite Homer (Simpson that is)-quotes: "red M&M's or blue M&M's: they all wind up the same color in the end." Kinda like both C# and VB.NET wind up as IL :-D:-> </rantmode>
-
About this mockery, <rantmode> Frankly I don't get the whole point, I being both a fanatic C# and VB.NET developer (VB.NET is for work), have totally no problems with the latter. In fact, I even tend to develop faster in VB.NET (the code completion in VS2005 is much more automated than in C#, plus the {} keys are somewhat akward on my keyboard layout). Under the hood, there is no differences at all (granted, both C# and VB.NET have some quircks and other stuff that are different or not supported, e.g. anonymous methods in C# or optional parameters in VB.NET). But all in all there isn't that much of a difference. I'd like to end with one of my all-time favourite Homer (Simpson that is)-quotes: "red M&M's or blue M&M's: they all wind up the same color in the end." Kinda like both C# and VB.NET wind up as IL :-D:-> </rantmode>
jonansie wrote:
I'd like to end with one of my all-time favourite Homer (Simpson that is)-quotes: "red M&M's or blue M&M's: they all wind up the same color in the end." Kinda like both C# and VB.NET wind up as IL
:laugh:
I'd love to help, but unfortunatley I have prior commitments monitoring the length of my grass. :Andrew Bleakley:
-
Amen brother.
Capital Punishment means never having to say "you again?" As easy as 3.141592653589793238462643383279502884197169
Nic Rowan wrote:
Amen brother.
What he said.
-
About this mockery, <rantmode> Frankly I don't get the whole point, I being both a fanatic C# and VB.NET developer (VB.NET is for work), have totally no problems with the latter. In fact, I even tend to develop faster in VB.NET (the code completion in VS2005 is much more automated than in C#, plus the {} keys are somewhat akward on my keyboard layout). Under the hood, there is no differences at all (granted, both C# and VB.NET have some quircks and other stuff that are different or not supported, e.g. anonymous methods in C# or optional parameters in VB.NET). But all in all there isn't that much of a difference. I'd like to end with one of my all-time favourite Homer (Simpson that is)-quotes: "red M&M's or blue M&M's: they all wind up the same color in the end." Kinda like both C# and VB.NET wind up as IL :-D:-> </rantmode>
Im all with you that there is very little difference in the languages. but the whole mindset around the VB community seems somewhat like Sesame Street. and that is what I find funny. If I got an email telling me how powerful loops are in C#, I would be very surprised. but when I got this one for VB.NET, I for some reason just smiled :) //Roger
-
Im all with you that there is very little difference in the languages. but the whole mindset around the VB community seems somewhat like Sesame Street. and that is what I find funny. If I got an email telling me how powerful loops are in C#, I would be very surprised. but when I got this one for VB.NET, I for some reason just smiled :) //Roger
Roger J wrote:
but the whole mindset around the VB community seems somewhat like Sesame Street.
The *real* issue IMO is this. Sure, you can almost do anything C# does in VB.NET ( barring unsafe blocks ). BUT, it's not that it's all there that is the point. What is the point is this. A lot of legacy garbage that MS wanted to get rid of is still in there, and a lot of people using VB.NET are using that stuff, instead of the new, .NET stuff. So, a lot of people are using VB.NET as if it was VB6. And they have no idea. Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog
-
Roger J wrote:
but the whole mindset around the VB community seems somewhat like Sesame Street.
The *real* issue IMO is this. Sure, you can almost do anything C# does in VB.NET ( barring unsafe blocks ). BUT, it's not that it's all there that is the point. What is the point is this. A lot of legacy garbage that MS wanted to get rid of is still in there, and a lot of people using VB.NET are using that stuff, instead of the new, .NET stuff. So, a lot of people are using VB.NET as if it was VB6. And they have no idea. Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog
Christian Graus wrote:
So, a lot of people are using VB.NET as if it was VB6. And they have no idea.
Ok I have to agree with you there. I'm the poor soul that has to fix that legacy rubbish... :doh:
Capital Punishment means never having to say "you again?" As easy as 3.141592653589793238462643383279502884197169
-
Super Lloyd wrote:
(and substraction!) in VB.NET4 ? perhaps?
Maybe they can add a spelling and grammer checker for C developers next. ;P I'm just teasing by the way...
Capital Punishment means never having to say "you again?" As easy as 3.141592653589793238462643383279502884197169
grammer grammar ;P '--8<------------------------ Ex Datis: Duncan Jones Merrion Computing Ltd
-
Roger J wrote:
but the whole mindset around the VB community seems somewhat like Sesame Street.
The *real* issue IMO is this. Sure, you can almost do anything C# does in VB.NET ( barring unsafe blocks ). BUT, it's not that it's all there that is the point. What is the point is this. A lot of legacy garbage that MS wanted to get rid of is still in there, and a lot of people using VB.NET are using that stuff, instead of the new, .NET stuff. So, a lot of people are using VB.NET as if it was VB6. And they have no idea. Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog
Christian Graus wrote:
A lot of legacy garbage that MS wanted to get rid of is still in there, and a lot of people using VB.NET are using that stuff, instead of the new, .NET stuff. So, a lot of people are using VB.NET as if it was VB6. And they have no idea.
Indeed, and it should be a federal crime to do so (or MS should ban the old code, heck, rename the whole language to Basic# or something :-D). I for myself only use the .NET kind of things, and I also have to do a lot of VB6 cleanup (basically the VB6 developer here never has a clue about what I'm doing when I ported another few lines of his code, except if this :wtf:, this :omg: or this :doh: stare means "I understand everything completely") Cheers
-
grammer grammar ;P '--8<------------------------ Ex Datis: Duncan Jones Merrion Computing Ltd
-
I get emails from .NET insight and today there was a link for the VB.NET developers: http://www.ftponline.com/vsm/2006_07/magazine/columns/desktopdeveloper/[^] So to all you VB developers out there, youd better learn that, its hot stuff :P ...well, enough with the mockery, I found it pretty funny that they had an article about why loops are good.
-
About this mockery, <rantmode> Frankly I don't get the whole point, I being both a fanatic C# and VB.NET developer (VB.NET is for work), have totally no problems with the latter. In fact, I even tend to develop faster in VB.NET (the code completion in VS2005 is much more automated than in C#, plus the {} keys are somewhat akward on my keyboard layout). Under the hood, there is no differences at all (granted, both C# and VB.NET have some quircks and other stuff that are different or not supported, e.g. anonymous methods in C# or optional parameters in VB.NET). But all in all there isn't that much of a difference. I'd like to end with one of my all-time favourite Homer (Simpson that is)-quotes: "red M&M's or blue M&M's: they all wind up the same color in the end." Kinda like both C# and VB.NET wind up as IL :-D:-> </rantmode>
-
About this mockery, <rantmode> Frankly I don't get the whole point, I being both a fanatic C# and VB.NET developer (VB.NET is for work), have totally no problems with the latter. In fact, I even tend to develop faster in VB.NET (the code completion in VS2005 is much more automated than in C#, plus the {} keys are somewhat akward on my keyboard layout). Under the hood, there is no differences at all (granted, both C# and VB.NET have some quircks and other stuff that are different or not supported, e.g. anonymous methods in C# or optional parameters in VB.NET). But all in all there isn't that much of a difference. I'd like to end with one of my all-time favourite Homer (Simpson that is)-quotes: "red M&M's or blue M&M's: they all wind up the same color in the end." Kinda like both C# and VB.NET wind up as IL :-D:-> </rantmode>
Let me offer my perspective. I've never learned VB. Cut my teeth on C/C++ in 94. Migrated in part to C# in 2001. This last year I've had to make nominal changes to a legacy version of our mobile product which is in VB6. After working for 11 years in C based languages I have to say that it hurts to think in VB. Its semantic and syntax, but I'm conditioned, and there's no way I would want to think in that language on a daily basis. For me, from my perspective its non-intuitive. Not to mention that the VB6 editor just sucks. Who knows, maybe VB.NET is all different and a joy, but I get the feeling that only people who learned this language early in their careers or have minds that think in this manner can like it. I can't. I don't buy into the notion that VBers aren't real coders, that's bull. But the language is just counter to how I think. This statement is false.