Why are people still ripping on VB.NET?
-
Did I not clear that up in a previous post? ;P Anyway I think the reason your pressious VB.net is so discriminated against is because it is often associated with beguinners... also its syntax is sub par.
Brad Australian - Christian Graus on "Best books for VBscript" A big thick one, so you can whack yourself on the head with it.
I know. It's the oldest debate in programming history. I don't even know why I started the conversation. I must have been in a bad mood that day when I saw that post. It is quite annoying though. I've seen things done in VB.NET that are incredible. I relented to the C++ guy because he showed me proof, but I have yet to see something similar for C#.
-
I just read a post where someone was trying to decide to write a new application in C++ or C# and commented on how some lame team member suggested VB.NET. Don't you people get it yet? It doesn't matter what language you program in .NET! I've written over a million lines of code across a few applications since 2001... and, oh my god, in VB.NET. I've never been limited in any way, and they are incredibly powerful systems. People who make comments to make themselves feel superior are whiners, and wannabee's. People who ARE superior take home the prom queen. Matt
Anybody for COBOL.NET?
-
I just read a post where someone was trying to decide to write a new application in C++ or C# and commented on how some lame team member suggested VB.NET. Don't you people get it yet? It doesn't matter what language you program in .NET! I've written over a million lines of code across a few applications since 2001... and, oh my god, in VB.NET. I've never been limited in any way, and they are incredibly powerful systems. People who make comments to make themselves feel superior are whiners, and wannabee's. People who ARE superior take home the prom queen. Matt
MachineGun wrote:
I've never been limited in any way, and they are incredibly powerful systems.
Well, that's only true because you've not needed the few things that C# does and VB.NET does not. You're mostly right, most things can be done in VB.NET. But, VB.NET does carry a lot of VB6 rubbish that makes it ugly compared to C#.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
-
I know. It's the oldest debate in programming history. I don't even know why I started the conversation. I must have been in a bad mood that day when I saw that post. It is quite annoying though. I've seen things done in VB.NET that are incredible. I relented to the C++ guy because he showed me proof, but I have yet to see something similar for C#.
Read my image processing articles.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )
-
MachineGun wrote:
What about that? Is it true for C# vs. VB.NET as well?
Is what true? They are not "exactly the same", yes they are not[^]. For me personally I have always found VB syntax next to unreadable. That wiith the inherent performance advantages in C# makes it a clear winner and a no brainer for me.
led mike
led mike wrote:
They are not "exactly the same"
It's true. .NET languages aren't all the same. What's true is that they are all on roughly the same footing with respect to access to the functionality of the .NET framework. They are not all equivalent with respect to language features and expressiveness.
led mike wrote:
I have always found VB syntax next to unreadable.
I have no problem with it. The C-family languages aren't exactly known for being strong on readability. Though Java and C# are significantly better than C and C++. All of them are much better than Perl though. However, in all cases, readability is enhanced by the care taken by the developer. Most developers write poorly readable code whatever the language. A least that's been my experience from doing a lot of maintenance work.
led mike wrote:
That wiith the inherent performance advantages in C#
The performance differences are largely not worth bothering about. In relation to VB and C# it is primarily a matter of taste. I personally prefer C# but I've also been doing VB .NET for quite a while and have done a lot of classic VB before that. My main background is C++ however. Most CPers seem to hate VB. But this is largely just language bigotry and snobbery.
Kevin
-
I just read a post where someone was trying to decide to write a new application in C++ or C# and commented on how some lame team member suggested VB.NET. Don't you people get it yet? It doesn't matter what language you program in .NET! I've written over a million lines of code across a few applications since 2001... and, oh my god, in VB.NET. I've never been limited in any way, and they are incredibly powerful systems. People who make comments to make themselves feel superior are whiners, and wannabee's. People who ARE superior take home the prom queen. Matt
The anti-VB sentiment is largely down to language bigotry and snobbery.
Kevin
-
led mike wrote:
They are not "exactly the same"
It's true. .NET languages aren't all the same. What's true is that they are all on roughly the same footing with respect to access to the functionality of the .NET framework. They are not all equivalent with respect to language features and expressiveness.
led mike wrote:
I have always found VB syntax next to unreadable.
I have no problem with it. The C-family languages aren't exactly known for being strong on readability. Though Java and C# are significantly better than C and C++. All of them are much better than Perl though. However, in all cases, readability is enhanced by the care taken by the developer. Most developers write poorly readable code whatever the language. A least that's been my experience from doing a lot of maintenance work.
led mike wrote:
That wiith the inherent performance advantages in C#
The performance differences are largely not worth bothering about. In relation to VB and C# it is primarily a matter of taste. I personally prefer C# but I've also been doing VB .NET for quite a while and have done a lot of classic VB before that. My main background is C++ however. Most CPers seem to hate VB. But this is largely just language bigotry and snobbery.
Kevin
Kevin McFarlane wrote:
But this is largely just language bigotry and snobbery.
With the advent of VB.NET that might be the case, but plain old VB was NOT a real programming language. I don't believe you can generalize about the bigotry. For my bias, I was doing Internet development in 1995 on NT and Windows 3.11 :omg: ( yes really), then Win95... etc., both server and client. I even worked on TCP/IP stacks. All of this work was using C/C++. VB was never an option for the work I was doing, it would have been like playing Pee Wee Herman in a wheel chair as your point guard in the NBA. As time passed "Web" development became very important and I found my server develpment experience in great demand requiring me to learn HTML, Javascript, XML, etc. Now Web development is considered "mundane" and Many of today’s "Web" developers came from a VB Drag and Drop Desktop application background. They have no multi-threading experience because the language did not support it. They have no "protocol" experience because they don't know anything they can't drag and drop. They don't understand OOP because the language didn't support it. There are so many things you COULD NOT DO in VB I don't have time to list them all. Now with VB.NET most of those limitations are gone from the langauge, but in many cases not from the practitioners. Many of todays VB proponents think just because the language now supports threading they of course are capable of developing multi-threaded code. That's the way it works right? The only reason people were able to do it in the past was because C++ supported it right? We just dragged a thread icon into our project and presto... multi-threading. Nothing personal against you, but when people want to discuss the bias as though there is no technical merit to it... for me that just borders disgusting... that is the source of my bias. So in addressing your generalization about the bigotry towards VB I was able to vent some... thanks! :-D
led mike
-
Kevin McFarlane wrote:
But this is largely just language bigotry and snobbery.
With the advent of VB.NET that might be the case, but plain old VB was NOT a real programming language. I don't believe you can generalize about the bigotry. For my bias, I was doing Internet development in 1995 on NT and Windows 3.11 :omg: ( yes really), then Win95... etc., both server and client. I even worked on TCP/IP stacks. All of this work was using C/C++. VB was never an option for the work I was doing, it would have been like playing Pee Wee Herman in a wheel chair as your point guard in the NBA. As time passed "Web" development became very important and I found my server develpment experience in great demand requiring me to learn HTML, Javascript, XML, etc. Now Web development is considered "mundane" and Many of today’s "Web" developers came from a VB Drag and Drop Desktop application background. They have no multi-threading experience because the language did not support it. They have no "protocol" experience because they don't know anything they can't drag and drop. They don't understand OOP because the language didn't support it. There are so many things you COULD NOT DO in VB I don't have time to list them all. Now with VB.NET most of those limitations are gone from the langauge, but in many cases not from the practitioners. Many of todays VB proponents think just because the language now supports threading they of course are capable of developing multi-threaded code. That's the way it works right? The only reason people were able to do it in the past was because C++ supported it right? We just dragged a thread icon into our project and presto... multi-threading. Nothing personal against you, but when people want to discuss the bias as though there is no technical merit to it... for me that just borders disgusting... that is the source of my bias. So in addressing your generalization about the bigotry towards VB I was able to vent some... thanks! :-D
led mike
led mike wrote:
plain old VB was NOT a real programming language.
Of course it was. Just because it didn't have the features you were interested in for the sort of work you do doesn't mean it's not a programming language. Languages are tools. Use the appropriate tool for the task in hand. It was much easier and quicker to do UI and database access work in VB than C++. A common scenario was to do this stuff in VB and have other business logic and data-structure-related stuff done in C++. Prior to .NET my experience was that this was an increasingly common trend in the Microsoft world.
led mike wrote:
They don't understand OOP because the language didn't support it.
So that means all procedural languages are worthless, right? (Actually, you could do OOP in VB6 with a little work. Rocky Lhotka's well-regarded CSLA framework was originally developed in VB - dating back to VB 4 in fact.)
Kevin
-
led mike wrote:
plain old VB was NOT a real programming language.
Of course it was. Just because it didn't have the features you were interested in for the sort of work you do doesn't mean it's not a programming language. Languages are tools. Use the appropriate tool for the task in hand. It was much easier and quicker to do UI and database access work in VB than C++. A common scenario was to do this stuff in VB and have other business logic and data-structure-related stuff done in C++. Prior to .NET my experience was that this was an increasingly common trend in the Microsoft world.
led mike wrote:
They don't understand OOP because the language didn't support it.
So that means all procedural languages are worthless, right? (Actually, you could do OOP in VB6 with a little work. Rocky Lhotka's well-regarded CSLA framework was originally developed in VB - dating back to VB 4 in fact.)
Kevin
Kevin McFarlane wrote:
this was an increasingly common trend in the Microsoft world.
I have zero experience where release software was developed using Visual Basic. I don't know what you mean by "Microsoft World". If you know of a Commercial Microsoft Product developed with VB please enlighten me.
Kevin McFarlane wrote:
Just because it didn't have the features you were interested in for the sort of work you do
"Interested in" See there you make it seem "optional"... it wasn't... deal with it.
led mike
-
Did I not clear that up in a previous post? ;P Anyway I think the reason your pressious VB.net is so discriminated against is because it is often associated with beguinners... also its syntax is sub par.
Brad Australian - Christian Graus on "Best books for VBscript" A big thick one, so you can whack yourself on the head with it.
-
Kevin McFarlane wrote:
this was an increasingly common trend in the Microsoft world.
I have zero experience where release software was developed using Visual Basic. I don't know what you mean by "Microsoft World". If you know of a Commercial Microsoft Product developed with VB please enlighten me.
Kevin McFarlane wrote:
Just because it didn't have the features you were interested in for the sort of work you do
"Interested in" See there you make it seem "optional"... it wasn't... deal with it.
led mike
led mike wrote:
I don't know what you mean by "Microsoft World".
Companies who use Microsoft developer tools.
led mike wrote:
If you know of a Commercial Microsoft Product developed with VB please enlighten me.
If you're talking about shrink-wrapped products I've no idea. But there's plenty of bespoke apps. in VB. I've worked at several companies that have used VB for commercial software.
Kevin
-
led mike wrote:
I don't know what you mean by "Microsoft World".
Companies who use Microsoft developer tools.
led mike wrote:
If you know of a Commercial Microsoft Product developed with VB please enlighten me.
If you're talking about shrink-wrapped products I've no idea. But there's plenty of bespoke apps. in VB. I've worked at several companies that have used VB for commercial software.
Kevin
-
Kevin McFarlane wrote:
plenty of bespoke apps
Developed by Microsoft? I suppose I could believe you but links would help. Most conversations comparing VB involve far to much speculation. ;)
led mike
led mike wrote:
Developed by Microsoft?
No, I meant developed by companies who use Microsoft dev tools. I don't have links because the apps. were for their customers, not for general consumption. A recent company I worked at in the UK called Vivista, now Sungard, wrote the GUI for the UK criminal justice Case Preparation and Custody suites in VB 6. However, I think there has been some MS software at least partially written in VB - IIRC bits of SQL Server. Probably config tools and the like. (Perhaps analogous to the way in which Google use Python in many of their web-facing apps.) What about all the jobs advertised for VB developers. Are the companies just paying these guys for fun? Do you dismiss all of the Excel VBA used in the financial sector?
Kevin
-
led mike wrote:
Developed by Microsoft?
No, I meant developed by companies who use Microsoft dev tools. I don't have links because the apps. were for their customers, not for general consumption. A recent company I worked at in the UK called Vivista, now Sungard, wrote the GUI for the UK criminal justice Case Preparation and Custody suites in VB 6. However, I think there has been some MS software at least partially written in VB - IIRC bits of SQL Server. Probably config tools and the like. (Perhaps analogous to the way in which Google use Python in many of their web-facing apps.) What about all the jobs advertised for VB developers. Are the companies just paying these guys for fun? Do you dismiss all of the Excel VBA used in the financial sector?
Kevin
Data entry screens for Databases and configuration does not qualify as Software Development from my perspective. People have written Data Entry screens in RPG for years for AS400 Databases, that does not make RPG a viable software development language for say a CAD system now does it?
Kevin McFarlane wrote:
Do you dismiss all of the Excel VBA used in the financial sector?
For the purpose of this discussion, yes. Look you are barking up the wrong tree... the bottom line is ( VB != VB.NET != C# != C++ ), period, it's a fact not an opinion. I would say this, "there is nothing wrong with using VB on a project, until there is". Probably there are scores of developers that use VB and now VB.NET that work on projects where they never have to face a barrier caused by a limitation in the language and/or tool. In my experience VB would not have been suitable for the projects I have worked on due to it's limitations. :)
led mike
-
Data entry screens for Databases and configuration does not qualify as Software Development from my perspective. People have written Data Entry screens in RPG for years for AS400 Databases, that does not make RPG a viable software development language for say a CAD system now does it?
Kevin McFarlane wrote:
Do you dismiss all of the Excel VBA used in the financial sector?
For the purpose of this discussion, yes. Look you are barking up the wrong tree... the bottom line is ( VB != VB.NET != C# != C++ ), period, it's a fact not an opinion. I would say this, "there is nothing wrong with using VB on a project, until there is". Probably there are scores of developers that use VB and now VB.NET that work on projects where they never have to face a barrier caused by a limitation in the language and/or tool. In my experience VB would not have been suitable for the projects I have worked on due to it's limitations. :)
led mike
led mike wrote:
the bottom line is ( VB != VB.NET != C# != C++ ), period, it's a fact not an opinion.
Of course. But that's very different from saying VB is not a real programming language or that because language X has a certain feature but language Y doesn't - therefore language Y isn't a real programming language.
Kevin