VB.NET news?
-
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.