VB6 apps [modified]

ChandraRam

cykophysh39 wrote:

Well to be a "real" programmer you need to know a whole heap of languages.

I should think you need to know how to program, period ;)

ChandraRam

Oh, but you misunderstood me... I was being sarcastic - due to the attitude that CPians generally have towards classic VB. I have (and still do) developed many apps using VB6... I really believe in using the tool best suited.

Kevin McFarlane

norm .net wrote:

it lets the less talented of users develop throw together bad applications

I've done and seen a lot of VB and a lot of C++ and there is no shortage of bad code in both. It's just down to the attitude of the developers.

Dan Neely

ChandraRam wrote:

What I was interested in was, what would (or should) the user of the app do to implement new requirements or fix things in the app, if all programmers were to migrate to a different language / platform, stating VB6 to be uncool?

Cobol's survived despite over a generation of mockery, VB will survive in the same "I hate it, but I hate unemployment worse" limbo.

-- Rules of thumb should not be taken for the whole hand.

NormDroid

Kevin McFarlane wrote:

attitude of the developers

I think you mean aptitude ;)

We made the buttons on the screen look so good you'll want to lick them. Steve Jobs

NormDroid

cykophysh39 wrote:

Well to be a "real" programmer you need to know a whole heap of languages.

You know that familiar saying "Jack of all trades..."

We made the buttons on the screen look so good you'll want to lick them. Steve Jobs

Marc Clifton

ChandraRam wrote:

was being sarcastic

Ah, well, I guess [sarcasm] tags would have been good. :)

ChandraRam wrote:

due to the attitude that CPians generally have towards classic VB.

Or VB in general. I'm definitely in the "I have an attitude" category, haha.

ChandraRam wrote:

I really believe in using the tool best suited.

If the customer is happy, that's pretty much 99.99% of all that counts. Marc

Thyme In The Country
Interacx

People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
People who say that they will refactor their code later to make it "good" don't understand refactoring, nor the art and craft of programming. -- Josh Smith

GaryWoodfine

Yeah I think this thread could run into the danger of growing to be an ever expanding discussion on the Merits of VB6 and C++, an argument that has existed for years and years. And there are compelling arguments for both. And the "Purists" could lose months of sleep debating this subject to nTH degree. But in Reality, as a Developer, I have used VB6 To quickly churn out business applications to be used, in half the time it would have taken to write in VC++, and it was always easier to assemble a team of competent VB programmers than it was to get competent VC++ developers and often cheaper. Again we could discuss the merits of this to the nTH degree, but the fact is the business got their application, I got money for contract, and everybody's happy :-)

Kind Regards, Gary

My Website || My Blog || My Articles

ChandraRam

Hear, hear! And this may be of interest - I have rewritten a C++ app to VB, due to bad (pathetic, actually) design / code, and because the customer wanted to maintain it themselves. So, as you say - depends on the programmer - bad is everywhere.

GaryWoodfine

norm .net wrote:

You see you're missing the whole point, VB6 was a scripting language for users and not a programming language for developers.

Ok So you're a purist on the "Programming", so are you're saying we should just stuck to just writing binary or Assembler, that way just skip the whole intermediate compiler step :-)

Kind Regards, Gary

My Website || My Blog || My Articles

NormDroid

cykophysh39 wrote:

I got money for contract

But what did the customer really get, "A quickly churned out application" - this wouldn't fill the customers heart with hope ;) -- modified at 9:34 Thursday 15th February, 2007

We made the buttons on the screen look so good you'll want to lick them. Steve Jobs

NormDroid

cykophysh39 wrote:

Ok So you're a purist on the "Programming", so are you're saying we should just stuck to just writing binary or Assembler, that way just skip the whole intermediate compiler step

Nope you're so far off... Any I'm a C# bigot now, so lets leave it at that.

We made the buttons on the screen look so good you'll want to lick them. Steve Jobs

ChandraRam

cykophysh39 wrote: I have used VB6 To quickly churn out business applications to be used, in half the time it would have taken to write in VC++,

That was the complete sentence.... Seriously, do you think that the application would have been more stable or better just because it was written in VC++? Is it not actually enough to deliver on the clients requirements? I fully expect to be flamed for this statement :rolleyes:

GaryWoodfine

And I'm a "Will code in any language you desire for food" bigot :-)

Kind Regards, Gary

My Website || My Blog || My Articles

GaryWoodfine

The customer got thier business requirement fulfilled cost effectively :-)

Kind Regards, Gary

My Website || My Blog || My Articles

ChandraRam

cykophysh39 wrote:

And I'm a "Will code in any language you desire for food" bigot

Well said... I do suspect many of us (including me) will fall under that category :)

R Giskard Reventlov

Look, it may not be the Rolls Royce of programming languages but it did do a good job in the right hands, just as c+ can do a terrible job in the wrong hands. In any case, if it was that bad that you had to rewrite all of the apps you came across in c++ or whatever, didn't that make you money by keeping you in work? Even with your opinion you ought to be grateful.

home
bookmarks

NormDroid

digital man wrote:

Even with your opinion you ought to be grateful

grateful? For what?:sigh: Putting up with low grade users trying to create applications with a low grade scripting tool?

We made the buttons on the screen look so good you'll want to lick them. Steve Jobs

GaryWoodfine

If the application does what it is required to do. i.e Allow data input, Retrieve data, Display data, manipulate data, blah blah!! It is fine. It's when people tried to use VB6 for tasks it just wasn't designed for that they started getting into trouble. This argument about Languages, platforms, yada yada is so stale, and has gone over so many times, that to be frank is just plain boring. It's the same as saying HTML is no good for rendering on the web, and we should all use XHTML 63.whatever, we forget that there was a space in time that HTML 1.0 was the dogs danglies. Sure it could've done as with improvements when it was released, but the fact is it done it's job when it needed too. I'm not saying all development should've been done in VB6, but at the same time I'm not going to say that no development should've been done in VB6. Does that the fact that c#2005 is now widely used discount all the development in C#2003? Honestly I have read many times on this argument so many times it's so boring. In my opinion there is/was nothing wrong with VB6. It was a decent tool to preform a job. Yes there were better tools,and I used them for specific jobs too but I never lost sleep over the fact that I could've done something in another language/platform/methodology. I used what I was required to use. Due to Budget/Time/Resources restraints. A Ferrari is a top dog in cars, but it isn't honestly any good in driving around town in?

Kind Regards, Gary

My Website || My Blog || My Articles

Fernando A Gomez F

According to Mayans, world ends in 2012. :cool:

A polar bear is a bear whose coordinates has been changed in terms of sine and cosine. Personal Site