The problem with VB?
-
Enough already! :) I really am getting frustrated with a lot of people that talk crap on VB when they couldn't give you one reason why it's bad. Personally, I use both C# and VB at work and can design and implement the exact same application using either. You can even use Ildasm to verify that you've created the same application. I understand that there are things you can do in VB that completely violate a number of OO concepts, but if you don't use these methods, what's the harm in hacking a out a few lines of VB?
-
Enough already! :) I really am getting frustrated with a lot of people that talk crap on VB when they couldn't give you one reason why it's bad. Personally, I use both C# and VB at work and can design and implement the exact same application using either. You can even use Ildasm to verify that you've created the same application. I understand that there are things you can do in VB that completely violate a number of OO concepts, but if you don't use these methods, what's the harm in hacking a out a few lines of VB?
jchigg2000 wrote:
when they couldn't give you one reason why it's bad.
Oh, there's some very good reasons. :) But most of them have nothing to do with the language. :laugh:
jchigg2000 wrote:
what's the harm in hacking a out a few lines of VB?
Bee eye en gee ooh! Marc
-
jchigg2000 wrote:
when they couldn't give you one reason why it's bad.
Oh, there's some very good reasons. :) But most of them have nothing to do with the language. :laugh:
jchigg2000 wrote:
what's the harm in hacking a out a few lines of VB?
Bee eye en gee ooh! Marc
I really expected more of a response to this! My guess is that all of the 'accused' are out googling so they can paste me a long list of someone else's thoughts ;)
-
I really expected more of a response to this! My guess is that all of the 'accused' are out googling so they can paste me a long list of someone else's thoughts ;)
jchigg2000 wrote:
I really expected more of a response to this!
Heh. Well, I was thinking of linking to some good sites that illustrate some of VB's particular problems, but then I figured, that's getting boring. :) Marc
-
I really expected more of a response to this! My guess is that all of the 'accused' are out googling so they can paste me a long list of someone else's thoughts ;)
Nobody's responding because everyone's tired of beating a dead horse.
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 -
Enough already! :) I really am getting frustrated with a lot of people that talk crap on VB when they couldn't give you one reason why it's bad. Personally, I use both C# and VB at work and can design and implement the exact same application using either. You can even use Ildasm to verify that you've created the same application. I understand that there are things you can do in VB that completely violate a number of OO concepts, but if you don't use these methods, what's the harm in hacking a out a few lines of VB?
Any language that not only features - but ENCOURAGES - the use of the
gotostatement should be stricken from the planet."Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001 -
jchigg2000 wrote:
I really expected more of a response to this!
Heh. Well, I was thinking of linking to some good sites that illustrate some of VB's particular problems, but then I figured, that's getting boring. :) Marc
I'll just wait for the links. I'm too lazy to Google right now.
So the creationist says: Everything must have a designer. God designed everything. I say: Why is God the only exception? Why not make the "designs" (like man) exceptions and make God a creation of man?
-
Enough already! :) I really am getting frustrated with a lot of people that talk crap on VB when they couldn't give you one reason why it's bad. Personally, I use both C# and VB at work and can design and implement the exact same application using either. You can even use Ildasm to verify that you've created the same application. I understand that there are things you can do in VB that completely violate a number of OO concepts, but if you don't use these methods, what's the harm in hacking a out a few lines of VB?
expected ';''--8<------------------------ Ex Datis: Duncan Jones Merrion Computing Ltd
-
Any language that not only features - but ENCOURAGES - the use of the
gotostatement should be stricken from the planet."Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001I would never use one. I just got finished with a masters level architecture and design course where i had to write 9 Assembly language programs (jump instructions = goto). The complexity of these things just gets out of hand incredibly quickly.
-
Enough already! :) I really am getting frustrated with a lot of people that talk crap on VB when they couldn't give you one reason why it's bad. Personally, I use both C# and VB at work and can design and implement the exact same application using either. You can even use Ildasm to verify that you've created the same application. I understand that there are things you can do in VB that completely violate a number of OO concepts, but if you don't use these methods, what's the harm in hacking a out a few lines of VB?
I found a seriously weird problem with VB once when using it to write a DB app that sat on a Jet engine. I had a controll called something like 'ListOfNames', the column in the Jet table was called the same thing, and for testing purposes I had a data row in the table. In this collum was a string, called, 'ListOfNames'. I could not get it to work untill I changed the datas to a different name. Now any machine thats building code by doing string comparison is, to me, in serious trouble. I quickly finished the app and have never gone near VB again. (It was historical, and had been started in VB and I had to maintain/finish it off. I had never used VB before but found it very easy).
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
Enough already! :) I really am getting frustrated with a lot of people that talk crap on VB when they couldn't give you one reason why it's bad. Personally, I use both C# and VB at work and can design and implement the exact same application using either. You can even use Ildasm to verify that you've created the same application. I understand that there are things you can do in VB that completely violate a number of OO concepts, but if you don't use these methods, what's the harm in hacking a out a few lines of VB?
I just think it is damned ugly and has a stupidly verbose syntax.
jchigg2000 wrote:
what's the harm in hacking a out a few lines of VB?
No real harm at all in my view since in my opinion there is little difference between C# and VB.net.
`
-
Enough already! :) I really am getting frustrated with a lot of people that talk crap on VB when they couldn't give you one reason why it's bad. Personally, I use both C# and VB at work and can design and implement the exact same application using either. You can even use Ildasm to verify that you've created the same application. I understand that there are things you can do in VB that completely violate a number of OO concepts, but if you don't use these methods, what's the harm in hacking a out a few lines of VB?
jchigg2000 wrote:
I really am getting frustrated with a lot of people that talk crap on VB when they couldn't give you one reason why it's bad.
Are you crazy, is that your problem? Don't you know that all the versions of VB prior to VB.NET where not an Object Oriented Language? That you could not write native multi-threading code? That you could not use Callback functions? I could go on but I don't want to take up anymore of your precious time for hacking out lines of VB garbage. I now return you to your regularly scheduled activity of creating technical debt. :rolleyes:
led mike
-
Enough already! :) I really am getting frustrated with a lot of people that talk crap on VB when they couldn't give you one reason why it's bad. Personally, I use both C# and VB at work and can design and implement the exact same application using either. You can even use Ildasm to verify that you've created the same application. I understand that there are things you can do in VB that completely violate a number of OO concepts, but if you don't use these methods, what's the harm in hacking a out a few lines of VB?
For me the main problem is the poor IDE integration in VS 2003/5 at least re: code snippets, intellisense, regions. I'm not particularly fussed by the different syntax, though I do prefer C#.
Kevin
-
jchigg2000 wrote:
I really am getting frustrated with a lot of people that talk crap on VB when they couldn't give you one reason why it's bad.
Are you crazy, is that your problem? Don't you know that all the versions of VB prior to VB.NET where not an Object Oriented Language? That you could not write native multi-threading code? That you could not use Callback functions? I could go on but I don't want to take up anymore of your precious time for hacking out lines of VB garbage. I now return you to your regularly scheduled activity of creating technical debt. :rolleyes:
led mike
This is more like it!! Yes, I realize everything that you just stated. I personally can't think of a single language that was spot on from it's inception. For instance, a lot of people criticize C++ for not completely supporting either OO or procedural programming styles.
-
Enough already! :) I really am getting frustrated with a lot of people that talk crap on VB when they couldn't give you one reason why it's bad. Personally, I use both C# and VB at work and can design and implement the exact same application using either. You can even use Ildasm to verify that you've created the same application. I understand that there are things you can do in VB that completely violate a number of OO concepts, but if you don't use these methods, what's the harm in hacking a out a few lines of VB?
The problem with VB is that it looks like an easy language on the surface, when in fact it is absolutely not. Granted, that's VB - I've never done VB.NET. And I will avoid VB.NET for the same reason I don't consider a swastika a suitable logo for my business card. [edit] Uh, oh, he said "Swastika" [/edit]
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
blog: TDD - the Aha! | Linkify!| FoldWithUs! | sighistmodified on Tuesday, May 27, 2008 5:08 PM
-
Enough already! :) I really am getting frustrated with a lot of people that talk crap on VB when they couldn't give you one reason why it's bad. Personally, I use both C# and VB at work and can design and implement the exact same application using either. You can even use Ildasm to verify that you've created the same application. I understand that there are things you can do in VB that completely violate a number of OO concepts, but if you don't use these methods, what's the harm in hacking a out a few lines of VB?
Didn't we just do this yesterday?
Christopher Duncan Author of The Career Programmer and Unite the Tribes www.PracticalUSA.com
-
Enough already! :) I really am getting frustrated with a lot of people that talk crap on VB when they couldn't give you one reason why it's bad. Personally, I use both C# and VB at work and can design and implement the exact same application using either. You can even use Ildasm to verify that you've created the same application. I understand that there are things you can do in VB that completely violate a number of OO concepts, but if you don't use these methods, what's the harm in hacking a out a few lines of VB?
VB is the Rodney Dangerfield of languages...gets no respect. Nothing wrong with VB.NET...VB6 on the other hand.... the other Marc with a C
-
Enough already! :) I really am getting frustrated with a lot of people that talk crap on VB when they couldn't give you one reason why it's bad. Personally, I use both C# and VB at work and can design and implement the exact same application using either. You can even use Ildasm to verify that you've created the same application. I understand that there are things you can do in VB that completely violate a number of OO concepts, but if you don't use these methods, what's the harm in hacking a out a few lines of VB?
The problem with VB.NET is the legacy from VB6, take out the legacy garbage like "On Error GoTo"(obvious), "Module"(it has encapsulation but everything public is at the same scope), and this language could be better than many others. I programmed in LISP, SCHEME, and PROLOG and that wasn't funny :(
-
I really expected more of a response to this! My guess is that all of the 'accused' are out googling so they can paste me a long list of someone else's thoughts ;)
jchigg2000 wrote:
My guess is that all of the 'accused' are out googling so they can paste me a long list of someone else's thoughts
Who are you accusing? Those of us who hate and use VB have posted our reasons for displeasure many times in the past. Are you really so immune to the truth that you've ignored all of it and still persist in thinking that bastard of a language has anything to redeem it apart from the steaming piles of horrible legacy code?
Citizen 20.1.01
'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master - that's all.'
-
Any language that not only features - but ENCOURAGES - the use of the
gotostatement should be stricken from the planet."Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001