VB/C# "Coevolution"
-
Maybe I haven't set up VS to make C# programming quicker, but I find the IDE in VB so much easier to use. For instance, the fact that you don't have to know which methods are available for a control, you just pick the one you want from the drop down's at the top of the code window. Or the fact that the VB IDE seems to correct a lot, which can make it a lot quicker...like if I type "if i = 0" and hit enter, it fills in the "Then" and "End If". And some of the statements seem more streamlined or with more functionality...for instance
Select Case intI
case <5
do something
case 6-10
do something else
case >10
do another thing
End Selector instead of
for (int i = 1; i <= 5; i++)how aboutfor i = 1 to 5. Personally, I find the VB IDE soooo much easier and quicker to use.William Winner wrote:
I find the IDE in VB so much easier to use
I've programmed a lot in both C# and VB .NET (and classic VB). I find the IDE support in C# way better than VB. In fact I find VB more irritating in this respect than any differences in the language. Some things just don't work properly at all, e.g., expand/collapse regions. Code snippets implementation is anal. IntelliSense implementation is clumsy. There are other negatives that I can't recall right now.
William Winner wrote:
if I type "if i = 0" and hit enter, it fills in the "Then" and "End If"
I agree, that's helpful in VB. In C# you can press tab twice to expand the "if" code snippet, type i == 0, then hit enter to move to the body. OK, so one more step than VB but nothing worth worrying about.
Kevin
-
I don't use C# a whole lot, and I hadn't found that little lightning bolt yet. Yeah, that would have helped a lot. I do like that the brackets identify a code block, but the VS IDE automatically handles the tabbing for both languages (though, every once in a while, they don't), and without that, both languages can be hard to determine which '}' goes with which '{'.
William Winner wrote:
both languages can be hard to determine which '}' goes with which '{'.
And in both languages good coding practice should shun deeply nested code. Unfortunately we frequently have to maintain it. :(
Kevin
-
That is one thing I miss about VB. I always prefered the End If/While/Function/Sub stuff instead of }. Makes it easier to see, yes, this code was an if statement, this was a while loop, etc. At least VS highlights the opening brace though. But that being said, I prefer c#, case sensitivity is actually nice when knowing where a variable was defined if you always follow a programming standard, variables starting with _ are global, lower case are defined in the method, and capitals are always the name of the method. At least, thats the way we do it here.
I like dead people. They are quiet and happy with what you give them.
ecooke wrote:
Makes it easier to see, yes, this code was an if statement, this was a while loop, etc
I actually use a CodeRush plugin to help me out. Amazingly useful, especially when I'm cutting and pasting code. See screenshot http://picasaweb.google.co.uk/lh/photo/esOenTrjP3l21VuPdYdRSw?feat=directlink[^] See the faint text at the end of the foreach and the end of the method. That text is just an overlay. It's not part of the file.
Kevin
-
VB code is THE ugliest code I've ever seen. I'm a .net developer, and am looking at a peachy job, only 8 miles from my house (I currently commute over 45 miles ONE WAY to work). I'm second guessing taking that job because... they code in VB. While I realize that vb.net is every bit effective as C#, it takes me back to the mid 90's, where VB6 (and earlier incarnations) was what people who WEREN'T real programmers used. It makes my stomach turn to even look at VB syntax. Do a search on CareerBuilder (or monster, or whatever) for the city where you live for ".NET DEVELOPER". Then see how many refer to VB. I did this for Charlotte, and got 51 hits (25 per page). On the first page, 22 were C#, one said vb/c#, one said vb, the other didn't specify. That's not even 10% usage. I didn't even bother to look at the second page. Businesses are primarily settling on C#. Probably because "real" programmers don't wanna look at that VB crap. That's not ME talking... that's the facts of the business world. Do your own search and see it for yourself.
IF you want to see ugly code, look at Forth or APL. Basic is much easier to understand.
-
VB code is THE ugliest code I've ever seen. I'm a .net developer, and am looking at a peachy job, only 8 miles from my house (I currently commute over 45 miles ONE WAY to work). I'm second guessing taking that job because... they code in VB. While I realize that vb.net is every bit effective as C#, it takes me back to the mid 90's, where VB6 (and earlier incarnations) was what people who WEREN'T real programmers used. It makes my stomach turn to even look at VB syntax. Do a search on CareerBuilder (or monster, or whatever) for the city where you live for ".NET DEVELOPER". Then see how many refer to VB. I did this for Charlotte, and got 51 hits (25 per page). On the first page, 22 were C#, one said vb/c#, one said vb, the other didn't specify. That's not even 10% usage. I didn't even bother to look at the second page. Businesses are primarily settling on C#. Probably because "real" programmers don't wanna look at that VB crap. That's not ME talking... that's the facts of the business world. Do your own search and see it for yourself.
I don't get it. For me, I see no major difference in readability or writeability between C# and VB. I'm just as comfortable with either, and I had assumed that to be true of all programmers. And VB isn't ugly unless the the programmer makes it that way. It seems to me that people who work with C exclusively don't like VB because it has removed some of the mysticism from computer programming, allowing the "average Joe" to do what he wants with his computer without waiting for weeks/months/years for someone to do it for him. But that's just my perception - maybe wrong. But then, I'm an old fart who learned VB long before C was a twinkle in it's daddy's eye.
-
I don't get it. For me, I see no major difference in readability or writeability between C# and VB. I'm just as comfortable with either, and I had assumed that to be true of all programmers. And VB isn't ugly unless the the programmer makes it that way. It seems to me that people who work with C exclusively don't like VB because it has removed some of the mysticism from computer programming, allowing the "average Joe" to do what he wants with his computer without waiting for weeks/months/years for someone to do it for him. But that's just my perception - maybe wrong. But then, I'm an old fart who learned VB long before C was a twinkle in it's daddy's eye.
tbarnhill wrote: But then, I'm an old fart who learned VB long before C was a twinkle in it's daddy's eye. No you didn't. The first version of Visual Basic (VB) wasn't even released until 1991. [^] C has been around since the early 70's. Yes "C" is not "C#", but "VB" is not basic, either. Nor is vb.net "VB". The VB that was VB6 is not the same as VB.NET. C# is a newer language that came AFTER VB6, but it takes C constructs (the same for(), while(), case{} statements), and adds the OOP of C++ in an easier to code manner. It's C on steroids, like vb.net is vb6 on steroids. Regardless of all that... C# is the same "distance" from C as VB.NET is from VB. Yes, my aversion to VB.NET is its "simpleton" aspect. Not because it allows others to do what I do, but it makes me feel like I'm back in 3rd grade having to write code in such a "backwards" (ie, non-sophisticated) way. I graduated college in 1986, AFTER a five year Air Force stint, so I doubt if you're much older (if any) than I am.... The PROFESSIONAL world DOES code "in C". I started coding in C professionally in 1987, and have been using it ever since. While Basic and VB was around... it was used by people who didn't have a C.S. education and were self-taught (not that there's anything wrong with that). Others who've been in the business as long feel the say way... All you have to do is the same "test" I did. Go to careerbuilder, monster, wherever, and do a search on a decent sized city near you for ".net developer" and see what the results turn up. For Charlotte, it was less than 10% VB. There's gotta be a reason for that... and I hope it stays that way. Let the "hacks" use VB, the rest of us will stick with C#.
-
tbarnhill wrote: But then, I'm an old fart who learned VB long before C was a twinkle in it's daddy's eye. No you didn't. The first version of Visual Basic (VB) wasn't even released until 1991. [^] C has been around since the early 70's. Yes "C" is not "C#", but "VB" is not basic, either. Nor is vb.net "VB". The VB that was VB6 is not the same as VB.NET. C# is a newer language that came AFTER VB6, but it takes C constructs (the same for(), while(), case{} statements), and adds the OOP of C++ in an easier to code manner. It's C on steroids, like vb.net is vb6 on steroids. Regardless of all that... C# is the same "distance" from C as VB.NET is from VB. Yes, my aversion to VB.NET is its "simpleton" aspect. Not because it allows others to do what I do, but it makes me feel like I'm back in 3rd grade having to write code in such a "backwards" (ie, non-sophisticated) way. I graduated college in 1986, AFTER a five year Air Force stint, so I doubt if you're much older (if any) than I am.... The PROFESSIONAL world DOES code "in C". I started coding in C professionally in 1987, and have been using it ever since. While Basic and VB was around... it was used by people who didn't have a C.S. education and were self-taught (not that there's anything wrong with that). Others who've been in the business as long feel the say way... All you have to do is the same "test" I did. Go to careerbuilder, monster, wherever, and do a search on a decent sized city near you for ".net developer" and see what the results turn up. For Charlotte, it was less than 10% VB. There's gotta be a reason for that... and I hope it stays that way. Let the "hacks" use VB, the rest of us will stick with C#.
You are absolutely correct. I meant to say BASIC (GW), not VB. I didn't start using VB until version 2.0 came out. My daughter graduated college in 1987, and I've been programming computers since 1963, so yeah, I've been around for a while. I learned and used three assemblers before I tackled C. Assemblers were much easier. And, yes, I learned them without formal training. It just took a few books and reading a few thousand lines of other people's code. If C was around in the 60s I was not aware of it, but then I didn't learn about it until around '82 (I think). I was happily programming business applications in BASIC before the first BASIC compiler was released. The fact remains, beauty, along with read and writeability is in the eye of the beholder. If you do better with C# than VB then that is where your talents should be focused. But I only do contact work now, so versatility is important to me. I probably won't be learning the next, hot, new programming language even if I'm around that long. My brain is too full to stuff anything else in there.
-
You are absolutely correct. I meant to say BASIC (GW), not VB. I didn't start using VB until version 2.0 came out. My daughter graduated college in 1987, and I've been programming computers since 1963, so yeah, I've been around for a while. I learned and used three assemblers before I tackled C. Assemblers were much easier. And, yes, I learned them without formal training. It just took a few books and reading a few thousand lines of other people's code. If C was around in the 60s I was not aware of it, but then I didn't learn about it until around '82 (I think). I was happily programming business applications in BASIC before the first BASIC compiler was released. The fact remains, beauty, along with read and writeability is in the eye of the beholder. If you do better with C# than VB then that is where your talents should be focused. But I only do contact work now, so versatility is important to me. I probably won't be learning the next, hot, new programming language even if I'm around that long. My brain is too full to stuff anything else in there.
Wow. Since 1963? No... C wasn't around then, nor probably even a "twinkle in the eye", as you said earlier. While I'm really not a fan of VB, I have a GREAT opportunity for a job... and they (as far as I know) only use VB.NET. If the interview turns out as well as I hope... I'm going to hope that VB.NET grows on me ?? Maybe I'll have to dig up this thread in a year from now and eat some crow. ;)
-
You are assuming that the ability to find each word of a programming language in an english dictionary defines how easy the language is to read. Within the context of programmers reading code (not an average Joe), C# is more succinct, and is therefore easier to read and write.
What an incredibly broad and ill-thought-out statement. Surely you are not a programmer. My guess is politician. Project Euler has many examples of languages that are incredibly succinct and pretty much unreadable. Verbosity = readablity = maintainability. C# syntax reminds me too much of regex. {()};
-
What an incredibly broad and ill-thought-out statement. Surely you are not a programmer. My guess is politician. Project Euler has many examples of languages that are incredibly succinct and pretty much unreadable. Verbosity = readablity = maintainability. C# syntax reminds me too much of regex. {()};