OMG - Just shoot me
-
I'm doing a client project where the only .NET developer is a DUMB hillbilly who only knew VB6 and basic VB.NET coding and demanded the work be done in VB.NET. But since my code was an intense Xml translation and serialization I wrote the code in C# and let the hillbilly convert them into VB so he felt comfy. Last night the manager over this guy said : Learning is over, take the horns and do all the coding ASAP...it has to be done on Friday! So after spending several hours coding a nice object model I got down to the last piece which was his core VB code. I planned on keeping this stuff for now since, after all, it worked and it wasn't broke. So I referenced my Utilities library and tried to access my static method that populates a collection of flat file objects and.... No matter what I did I could not find that method! It took maybe a 2 minute search to find that VB does not allow static classes and does not allow instance classes that contain only static methods. Holy crap what a bucket of bull spit!!!! So I ended up coding until 12:30 this morning making the VB frontend a C# frontend and VOILA I can actually see a validly-coded class!!!
Dunno why the ney sayers voted you down, but VB sucks and blows.
-
Dunno why the ney sayers voted you down, but VB sucks and blows.
Because the univoters have got habituated to code in VB.
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
A pessimist sees only the dark side of the clouds, and mopes; a philosopher sees both sides, and shrugs; an optimist doesn't see the clouds at all - he's walking on them. --Leonard Louis Levinson -
Dunno why the ney sayers voted you down, but VB sucks and blows.
so the wind in NM is because Arizona and Texas use VB! :mad:
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
modified on Thursday, March 27, 2008 11:30 AM
-
I'm doing a client project where the only .NET developer is a DUMB hillbilly who only knew VB6 and basic VB.NET coding and demanded the work be done in VB.NET. But since my code was an intense Xml translation and serialization I wrote the code in C# and let the hillbilly convert them into VB so he felt comfy. Last night the manager over this guy said : Learning is over, take the horns and do all the coding ASAP...it has to be done on Friday! So after spending several hours coding a nice object model I got down to the last piece which was his core VB code. I planned on keeping this stuff for now since, after all, it worked and it wasn't broke. So I referenced my Utilities library and tried to access my static method that populates a collection of flat file objects and.... No matter what I did I could not find that method! It took maybe a 2 minute search to find that VB does not allow static classes and does not allow instance classes that contain only static methods. Holy crap what a bucket of bull spit!!!! So I ended up coding until 12:30 this morning making the VB frontend a C# frontend and VOILA I can actually see a validly-coded class!!!
LongRange.Shooter wrote:
VB does not allow static classes and does not allow instance classes that contain only static methods. Holy crap what a bucket of bull spit!!!!
Well now, that would be too confusing to VB devs, trying to understand that a class can actually be static. What, no "new"? But, but... brain overload! Another way to look at it is, it's Microsoft protecting the VB dev from himself. Imagine trying to explain why you don't access static methods and classes in different threads. It's just easier to not even allow them. Microsoft is smarter than you think, in a dumb sort of way. Marc
-
so the wind in NM is because Arizona and Texas use VB! :mad:
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
modified on Thursday, March 27, 2008 11:30 AM
Hey hey hey! Don't mess with Arizona.
-
I'm doing a client project where the only .NET developer is a DUMB hillbilly who only knew VB6 and basic VB.NET coding and demanded the work be done in VB.NET. But since my code was an intense Xml translation and serialization I wrote the code in C# and let the hillbilly convert them into VB so he felt comfy. Last night the manager over this guy said : Learning is over, take the horns and do all the coding ASAP...it has to be done on Friday! So after spending several hours coding a nice object model I got down to the last piece which was his core VB code. I planned on keeping this stuff for now since, after all, it worked and it wasn't broke. So I referenced my Utilities library and tried to access my static method that populates a collection of flat file objects and.... No matter what I did I could not find that method! It took maybe a 2 minute search to find that VB does not allow static classes and does not allow instance classes that contain only static methods. Holy crap what a bucket of bull spit!!!! So I ended up coding until 12:30 this morning making the VB frontend a C# frontend and VOILA I can actually see a validly-coded class!!!
You've got to stick to your guns and not compromise your principles. If you can't convince them, walk away.
-
LongRange.Shooter wrote:
VB does not allow static classes and does not allow instance classes that contain only static methods. Holy crap what a bucket of bull spit!!!!
Well now, that would be too confusing to VB devs, trying to understand that a class can actually be static. What, no "new"? But, but... brain overload! Another way to look at it is, it's Microsoft protecting the VB dev from himself. Imagine trying to explain why you don't access static methods and classes in different threads. It's just easier to not even allow them. Microsoft is smarter than you think, in a dumb sort of way. Marc
Marc Clifton wrote:
Microsoft protecting the VB dev from himself
To me that reads the same as "you could zip yourself into this here straight-jacket"
"Every time Lotus Notes starts up, somewhere a puppy, a kitten, a lamb, and a baby seal are killed. Lotus Notes is a conspiracy by the forces of Satan to drive us over the brink into madness. The CRC-32 for each file in the installation includes the numbers 666." Gary Wheeler "The secret to a long and healthy life is simple. Don't get ill and don't die." Pete O'Hanlon, courtesy of Rama "I realised that all of my best anecdotes started with "So there we were, pissed". Pete O'Hanlon
-
You've got to stick to your guns and not compromise your principles. If you can't convince them, walk away.
PIEBALDconsult wrote:
You've got to stick to your guns and not compromise your principles. If you can't convince them, walk away.
Yep. It might not be worth the hassle to stick around.
"The clue train passed his station without stopping." - John Simmons / outlaw programmer "Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
-
I'm doing a client project where the only .NET developer is a DUMB hillbilly who only knew VB6 and basic VB.NET coding and demanded the work be done in VB.NET. But since my code was an intense Xml translation and serialization I wrote the code in C# and let the hillbilly convert them into VB so he felt comfy. Last night the manager over this guy said : Learning is over, take the horns and do all the coding ASAP...it has to be done on Friday! So after spending several hours coding a nice object model I got down to the last piece which was his core VB code. I planned on keeping this stuff for now since, after all, it worked and it wasn't broke. So I referenced my Utilities library and tried to access my static method that populates a collection of flat file objects and.... No matter what I did I could not find that method! It took maybe a 2 minute search to find that VB does not allow static classes and does not allow instance classes that contain only static methods. Holy crap what a bucket of bull spit!!!! So I ended up coding until 12:30 this morning making the VB frontend a C# frontend and VOILA I can actually see a validly-coded class!!!
-
Hey hey hey! Don't mess with Arizona.
PIEBALDconsult wrote:
Hey hey hey! Don't mess with Arizona.
okay... California and Texas use VB and Arizona and NM get the fallout??!!
_________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)