Why is VB being forsaken?
-
For anyone reading Mark's response, it's important to note his qualifier, "In general". What he says is true. This is not to say that every VB programmer is less sophisticated than every C# programmer; there are some very good developers who happen to prefer VB. However, in the general sense, my experience has also been that people who develop in VB don't have has strong a grasp of the underlying fundamentals as those in C#. Thus, their applications are not as robust. For me, it seems as if the tools which go along with VB just don't work quite as well as with C#. Intellisense, for example: it seems as if, once I've made a syntax error in VB, inellisense just quits working, and it's more forgiving in C#.
agolddog wrote:
For me, it seems as if the tools which go along with VB just don't work quite as well as with C#. Intellisense, for example: it seems as if, once I've made a syntax error in VB, inellisense just quits working, and it's more forgiving in C#.
That is just plain silly. You don't want immediate feedback when you have typed bad code??? You are right, since intellisense in C# is far less aware of what is being written, C#, much more often than VB.NET, must compile bad code before spotting an error. I have never regarded that as a feature to be touted, but a failing that must be borne.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
:zzz:
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
That was me. Until I learned SQL, which is fun.
Exactly how can SQL be compared to any programming language? Since, you know.. it is not a programming language. ANSI/ISO SQL is not Turing complete. Now if you are speaking about some "real" programming language that is an expansion of SQL that is another subject. But SQL on its own is not a programming language, it is a language... just not a programming one :D.
-
Exactly how can SQL be compared to any programming language? Since, you know.. it is not a programming language. ANSI/ISO SQL is not Turing complete. Now if you are speaking about some "real" programming language that is an expansion of SQL that is another subject. But SQL on its own is not a programming language, it is a language... just not a programming one :D.
It's a transform language, it transforms tables of data into other tables of data. Queries can be optimised, there are various key words for performing different functions, there's maths, filtering, and formatting, it's just that the inputs and outputs are limited to tabular format. Some problems are tricky and require programmer skill to solve.
-
Mark Nischalke wrote:
Compared with the clean syntax of C#, VB.NET is horrid.
One of the silliest things some folks do is think that their personal preferences are actually laws of nature. When someone is used to reading one language and has trouble with the other that defines not the language, but the programmer.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
Oakman wrote:
One of the silliest things
So your arguement is my stated personal opinion is "silly" and I'm at fault for perfering one over the other? Good arguement. A really a good way to have an open and mature discussion. :rolleyes:
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
-
All the programming I have done has been with VB then VB.NET. Microsoft keeps continues to develop and release it along side C# and the rest. However, over the last few years, I have seen very little new information out there regarding VB. Very few articles on Code Project and other sites. Oh, and I'm a subscriber to MSDN magazine and I haven't seen a single line of VB.NET code in .. in .. I can't even remember the last issue. I can say at least the last four issues there hasn't been anything in VB.NET. It's all been C#, C++ and even F# but no VB! Is Microsoft trying to push it to the side so it whithers and dies and hope that no one notices or pays attention? Even here on Code Project I've noted next to nothing new on VB. Every week I get the newsletter with all the new articles and rarely do I see anything on VB.NET. There may be one article among the 30 C# articles but that's on a good week. So, what am I supposed to do? Just stop using it, pick up a "Learning C# For Lonely, Left Behind VB.NET Programmers" and just think of VB.NET as fond memories of long ago? I have a hard time with such a concept. VB.NET has evolved into a good language and is capable of doing pretty much anything C# can do (using the .net framework, of course) so why isn't it promoted more by MS and others?
I started programming 3 years ago with VB.NET and encountered the same things you are seeing now. It won't change. VB developers are generally less likely to put content online. Limiting yourself consuming just VB or C# articles is just silly. Here's a cheat sheet to get things started. If you embrace both languages equally you should have no problem applying C# articles to your VB development.
-
Oakman wrote:
One of the silliest things
So your arguement is my stated personal opinion is "silly" and I'm at fault for perfering one over the other? Good arguement. A really a good way to have an open and mature discussion. :rolleyes:
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
Mark Nischalke wrote:
So your arguement is my stated personal opinion is "silly" and I'm at fault for perfering one over the other?
Nope. I'll type slower so maybe you'll understand. ;) When someone expresses his personal opinion as if it is a law of nature, he is being silly. When a programmers blames the language for the mistakes he makes, he is being silly. Now, if the shoe fits, then by all means wear it. If not, then deal with the points I made rather than acting as if I attacked you rather than your argument.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
agolddog wrote:
For me, it seems as if the tools which go along with VB just don't work quite as well as with C#. Intellisense, for example: it seems as if, once I've made a syntax error in VB, inellisense just quits working, and it's more forgiving in C#.
That is just plain silly. You don't want immediate feedback when you have typed bad code??? You are right, since intellisense in C# is far less aware of what is being written, C#, much more often than VB.NET, must compile bad code before spotting an error. I have never regarded that as a feature to be touted, but a failing that must be borne.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
Oakman wrote:
That is just plain silly.
A very mature attitude.
Oakman wrote:
You don't want immediate feedback when you have typed bad code???
Then how do you explain this? In VB.NET this won't flag anything in intellisence nor when compiled. It will throw an exception at runtime.
Dim i As Integer
Dim x As String
i = 0
x = "foo"
If i = x Then
End IfIn C# intellisence will show the error and it won't compile.
int i = 0;
string x = "foo";
if(i == x)
{
}Oakman wrote:
since intellisense in C# is far less aware of what is being written, C#, much more often than VB.NET, must compile bad code before spotting an error.
Care to re-state this?
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
-
Mark Nischalke wrote:
It allows for stupid things to be done without the developer having to actually think about what they are doing.
I have seen some really horrifying code written by developers (who obviously weren't thinking) in C#. You seem to want to blame the language for the faults of the programmer. In truth, inferior programmers will write inferior code in any language and superior programmers will write superior code in any language.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
Oakman wrote:
You seem to want to blame the language for the faults of the programmer
I think you should read my comments more carefully. http://www.codeproject.com/Lounge.aspx?msg=3978112#xx3978112xx[^] "Not that the language itself is bad, the developers using it, IMO, mostly, don't have the skills, training, or experience to write software in the best manner."
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
-
kenSemantics wrote:
VB does it for you.
Yes VB does a lot for you, but that is a problem. It allows for stupid things to be done without the developer having to actually think about what they are doing.
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
really, isnt it the responsibility of the developer to take care of what he is writing? if the language does something without his knowing then he is just a bad programmer.
-
All the programming I have done has been with VB then VB.NET. Microsoft keeps continues to develop and release it along side C# and the rest. However, over the last few years, I have seen very little new information out there regarding VB. Very few articles on Code Project and other sites. Oh, and I'm a subscriber to MSDN magazine and I haven't seen a single line of VB.NET code in .. in .. I can't even remember the last issue. I can say at least the last four issues there hasn't been anything in VB.NET. It's all been C#, C++ and even F# but no VB! Is Microsoft trying to push it to the side so it whithers and dies and hope that no one notices or pays attention? Even here on Code Project I've noted next to nothing new on VB. Every week I get the newsletter with all the new articles and rarely do I see anything on VB.NET. There may be one article among the 30 C# articles but that's on a good week. So, what am I supposed to do? Just stop using it, pick up a "Learning C# For Lonely, Left Behind VB.NET Programmers" and just think of VB.NET as fond memories of long ago? I have a hard time with such a concept. VB.NET has evolved into a good language and is capable of doing pretty much anything C# can do (using the .net framework, of course) so why isn't it promoted more by MS and others?
I'm Lucian Wischik, the VB language PM at Microsoft. Since VS2010 we've put a huge amount of resources behind VB. We haven't announced all the new features, but here are just some of the new VB features we've already announced: * Async programming, developed absolutely equally with C#. * Iterators, like C#, but also allowing lambda iterators and yield inside try blocks which C# doesn't have. * VBCore - removes the dependency on Microsoft.VisualBasic.dll, so VB is as easy for 3rd-parties to use as C#. * New platforms - VB support added to Windows Phone 7, to the Micro Framework (i.e. Netduino), to XNA. * (and smaller fixes, like no longer prettylisting that blasted "ByVal" in front of everything, and emitting minimally-qualified names) And of course all of these features benefit from the things we know and love about VB, like QuickFixes and XML. Here's an interesting code snippet which ties together several unique VB features at the same time:
Sub Main()
Dim xml =<%= Iterator Function() For Each robot In {"alpha", "beta", "gamma"} Yield * Robot <%= robot %> reporting in for duty Next End Function() %>Console.WriteLine(xml)
End SubWhat this shows is code that on the surface looks similar in structure to ASP/PHP, but is actually fully typesafe. Personally, I've switched over all my hobby web-services from python to this kind of VB because I can code them quicker and with fewer bugs thanks to the type safety. -- Lucian Wischik, VB language PM
-
Oakman wrote:
That is just plain silly.
A very mature attitude.
Oakman wrote:
You don't want immediate feedback when you have typed bad code???
Then how do you explain this? In VB.NET this won't flag anything in intellisence nor when compiled. It will throw an exception at runtime.
Dim i As Integer
Dim x As String
i = 0
x = "foo"
If i = x Then
End IfIn C# intellisence will show the error and it won't compile.
int i = 0;
string x = "foo";
if(i == x)
{
}Oakman wrote:
since intellisense in C# is far less aware of what is being written, C#, much more often than VB.NET, must compile bad code before spotting an error.
Care to re-state this?
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
Dim i As Integer
Dim x As String
i = 0
x = "0"
If i = x Then
End IfIn languages like Javascript and Python, this works fine. Obviously it depends on whether x was initialized to a string like "0" which can be converted to an integer, or one like "foo" which can't. In C# it never works. In VB you get the best of both worlds -- you can chose to code in a Python-like fashion (Option Strict Off), or in a C# fashion (Option Strict On), or you can make it merely give warnings for things like this which may or may not work (Option Strict Custom). It depends very much on the kind of programming you want to do. We try to avoid dogma here, and instead go on the results of extensive user studies. -- Lucian Wischik, VB language PM
-
Oakman wrote:
That is just plain silly.
A very mature attitude.
Oakman wrote:
You don't want immediate feedback when you have typed bad code???
Then how do you explain this? In VB.NET this won't flag anything in intellisence nor when compiled. It will throw an exception at runtime.
Dim i As Integer
Dim x As String
i = 0
x = "foo"
If i = x Then
End IfIn C# intellisence will show the error and it won't compile.
int i = 0;
string x = "foo";
if(i == x)
{
}Oakman wrote:
since intellisense in C# is far less aware of what is being written, C#, much more often than VB.NET, must compile bad code before spotting an error.
Care to re-state this?
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
Mark Nischalke wrote:
A very mature attitude.
It is silly, Mark. Smart people say silly things, even I do. The idea that one would want to wait for compile time to learn about an error is silly. It doesn't matter what language one is using. The idea is silly.
Mark Nischalke wrote:
Care to re-state this?
You seem to think that I am going to defend the idiosyncrasies of VB.NET because I agreed with something that someone else said about C#, but did not find it attractive the way they did. Well just because I think Obama is incompetent, doesn't mean I think John McCain is any better. Ditto for not getting feedback when you make a mistake in C# or in VB. I do not think that VB.NET is perfect. I do not think that VB.NET is always the best choice, and I do not think that C# is inferior to VB.NET. But I do think that when people start claiming that their personal preferences are laws of nature, they are being silly.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
Dim i As Integer
Dim x As String
i = 0
x = "0"
If i = x Then
End IfIn languages like Javascript and Python, this works fine. Obviously it depends on whether x was initialized to a string like "0" which can be converted to an integer, or one like "foo" which can't. In C# it never works. In VB you get the best of both worlds -- you can chose to code in a Python-like fashion (Option Strict Off), or in a C# fashion (Option Strict On), or you can make it merely give warnings for things like this which may or may not work (Option Strict Custom). It depends very much on the kind of programming you want to do. We try to avoid dogma here, and instead go on the results of extensive user studies. -- Lucian Wischik, VB language PM
ljw1004 wrote:
We try to avoid dogma here, and instead go on the results of extensive user studies.
What a novel idea! ;)
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
Oakman wrote:
You seem to want to blame the language for the faults of the programmer
I think you should read my comments more carefully. http://www.codeproject.com/Lounge.aspx?msg=3978112#xx3978112xx[^] "Not that the language itself is bad, the developers using it, IMO, mostly, don't have the skills, training, or experience to write software in the best manner."
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
Mark Nischalke wrote:
I think you should read my comments more carefully.
You're absolutely right. I apologize.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
-
really, isnt it the responsibility of the developer to take care of what he is writing? if the language does something without his knowing then he is just a bad programmer.
kenSemantics wrote:
isnt it the responsibility of the developer to take care of what he is writing?
Correct
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
-
All the programming I have done has been with VB then VB.NET. Microsoft keeps continues to develop and release it along side C# and the rest. However, over the last few years, I have seen very little new information out there regarding VB. Very few articles on Code Project and other sites. Oh, and I'm a subscriber to MSDN magazine and I haven't seen a single line of VB.NET code in .. in .. I can't even remember the last issue. I can say at least the last four issues there hasn't been anything in VB.NET. It's all been C#, C++ and even F# but no VB! Is Microsoft trying to push it to the side so it whithers and dies and hope that no one notices or pays attention? Even here on Code Project I've noted next to nothing new on VB. Every week I get the newsletter with all the new articles and rarely do I see anything on VB.NET. There may be one article among the 30 C# articles but that's on a good week. So, what am I supposed to do? Just stop using it, pick up a "Learning C# For Lonely, Left Behind VB.NET Programmers" and just think of VB.NET as fond memories of long ago? I have a hard time with such a concept. VB.NET has evolved into a good language and is capable of doing pretty much anything C# can do (using the .net framework, of course) so why isn't it promoted more by MS and others?
Like a lot of people I started my career with VB (VB 5 to be exact) and have over the years picked up on other languages and what not (HTML, PHP, C#, C++, JavaScript). Right now about 70% of my work is done in VB.Net, 10% in C#, 15% in HTML/PHP and the rest in C++. (Now if you want something to complain about, try the lack of apparent support of C++ in VS 2010 and then get back to me) I've yet to have a application I've written in C# that I couldn't have done in VB. It just struck me that on that particular day I wanted to do some C# work instead of VB when I was getting started. The one nice thing about C++ is you have lots of control over how things work, the one bad thing is you have lots of control over how things work... Where as in VB and C# you can get a lot done and not have to worry about a lot of the heavy lifting (as mentioned by someone before) in a fraction of the time. Like a lot I really hope they keep VB around for many, many more years as it really is a great language for many things.
-
Mark Nischalke wrote:
A very mature attitude.
It is silly, Mark. Smart people say silly things, even I do. The idea that one would want to wait for compile time to learn about an error is silly. It doesn't matter what language one is using. The idea is silly.
Mark Nischalke wrote:
Care to re-state this?
You seem to think that I am going to defend the idiosyncrasies of VB.NET because I agreed with something that someone else said about C#, but did not find it attractive the way they did. Well just because I think Obama is incompetent, doesn't mean I think John McCain is any better. Ditto for not getting feedback when you make a mistake in C# or in VB. I do not think that VB.NET is perfect. I do not think that VB.NET is always the best choice, and I do not think that C# is inferior to VB.NET. But I do think that when people start claiming that their personal preferences are laws of nature, they are being silly.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.
Oakman wrote:
when people start claiming that their personal preferences are laws of nature
You have mentioned this several times. Where has anyone in this thread stated that? I see balanced statments like, "its not the language's fault", or opinions based on experience. No where have I seen anyone stating their way is the best and only way and a 'law of nature'. Warning: Opinion follows [opinion] I have encountered more VB developers who get upset when the question of VB.NET vs C# is raised than C#. Why is this? Its almost like Apple minions when discussing an Apple device vs another brand. [/opinion] Disclaimer: The previous statment is an opinion of the author and should not be viewed as a Law of Nature.
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
-
All the programming I have done has been with VB then VB.NET. Microsoft keeps continues to develop and release it along side C# and the rest. However, over the last few years, I have seen very little new information out there regarding VB. Very few articles on Code Project and other sites. Oh, and I'm a subscriber to MSDN magazine and I haven't seen a single line of VB.NET code in .. in .. I can't even remember the last issue. I can say at least the last four issues there hasn't been anything in VB.NET. It's all been C#, C++ and even F# but no VB! Is Microsoft trying to push it to the side so it whithers and dies and hope that no one notices or pays attention? Even here on Code Project I've noted next to nothing new on VB. Every week I get the newsletter with all the new articles and rarely do I see anything on VB.NET. There may be one article among the 30 C# articles but that's on a good week. So, what am I supposed to do? Just stop using it, pick up a "Learning C# For Lonely, Left Behind VB.NET Programmers" and just think of VB.NET as fond memories of long ago? I have a hard time with such a concept. VB.NET has evolved into a good language and is capable of doing pretty much anything C# can do (using the .net framework, of course) so why isn't it promoted more by MS and others?
I won't comment about Microsofts reasons or motives in changing VB, but I will comment about the Basic language and why some may prefer not to switch to C#. BASIC has a very, very long history and despite all the criticism it has received it has endured. Why ? Because Basic is a more natural language as far as its syntax. Even non-programmers can examine Basic code and make some sense of what it is doing, unlike C code which is an acquired taste. I have been programming in Basic since 1975. I learned some Fortran, gotten plenty of books on C (interested) and even purchased a C compiler or two, but just never picked up the language. Very quickly the syntax of the language (C) was counter intuitive to my first language Basic. Now I did take the time to learn some machine language (wrote a compiler using Basic for the 6502 CPU for the commodore 64). I also learned some intel assembler and wrote some library code for use with PDS 7.1 using assembler. To me machine language and assembler was easier to pick up than C. Over the years I moved on to VB 1.0, 2.0 and finally 5.0 Pro (stopped there). Amazingly, it was all the OOP stuff which I began to dislike. While OOP has its place, OOP is not the programming panacea it was first thought to be. I personally prefer more procedural style coding over OOP and I am far more productive with such code. I still love the Basic language and it still lives despite dot.net. For the last 10 years I have used PowerBasic, rather than any Microsoft Basic. I still like VB, but it has changed too much for me and is not efficient enough for me. From my experience I find it is best not to learn too many different programming languages. You know the old saying, "jack of all trades, but master of none". I find it better to pick the language you are most productive in and to become an expert in it. If you want to learn a second language, I would recommend it be assembler (or machine language). Learning machine language makes one appreciate what a compiler does even more. One of the beauties of Basic is its readability. One can pick up code written years ago and quickly make sense of it. Now one good reason the Basic language should not be changed (the core language left alone), but rather simply add new features to it, is that if languages keep changing every few years, then much time is lost in having to rewrite code for a new syntax. When you can have perfect code which was written years ago, simply reused today, then you don't have to reinvent the wheel all the time. Sure
-
Oakman wrote:
when people start claiming that their personal preferences are laws of nature
You have mentioned this several times. Where has anyone in this thread stated that? I see balanced statments like, "its not the language's fault", or opinions based on experience. No where have I seen anyone stating their way is the best and only way and a 'law of nature'. Warning: Opinion follows [opinion] I have encountered more VB developers who get upset when the question of VB.NET vs C# is raised than C#. Why is this? Its almost like Apple minions when discussing an Apple device vs another brand. [/opinion] Disclaimer: The previous statment is an opinion of the author and should not be viewed as a Law of Nature.
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
Mark Nischalke wrote:
Where has anyone in this thread stated that?
I don't play those games, Mark. I was using the USENET 20 something years ago and have probably seen every type of debate happen in that time, here, there, and elsewhere. As a result all the little tricks of "I never said exactly that" really bore me. Where I realized I'd misattributed something to you that you didn't say, I apologized. But for categorizing my opinion of an attitude that i believe is displayed by far too many developers in words that seemed to have upset you far beyond their intent or content, I have no need nor impulse to retract anything I said. If you have something to say about what I think of the two languages, or of people who cannot handle both with equal ease, I'd be delighted to hear them. If you want to continue to drag red herrings into the discussion, I'll give you the last word and go do something important like sort my socks.
The 3-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages, and mathematics. Equipped with these three you can learn anything you want to learn. But if you lack any one of them you are just another ignorant peasant with dung on your boots. R. A. H.