VB6: Best programming language ever
-
It wasn't a bad language. If it was a bad language, there wouldn't have been such a demand for it in the business community. It did exactly what it set out to do - make developing business applications quick.
-
We still have many VB6 code around here (mostly batch and client legacy apps). The main reason behind is that the .NET framework is not installed on standard end user PC images.:mad:
The signature is in building process.. Please wait...
-
What a bunch of crack smoking dullards!! I had to keep it kid sister safe...
A guide to posting questions on CodeProject
How to debug small programs
Dave KreskowiakI agree with you whole heartidly though :laugh:
-
I realise I may get flamed for this, and I am mentally prepared for it, but VB6 was not as bad as people make it out to be. Sure it was not the best language for much of anything, but it is not as bad as people make it out to be. .NET was far worse, and I would even go as far as to say that C# is more shoddy than VB6 ever was or ever will be. Now before the flaming starts hear me out. I personally would class VB6 as an intermediary language, sure there was a lot more managed libraries than C++ will ever have, but the amount of managed code in VB6 pales in comparison to the amount of managed code in .NET or C#. As someone who has dabbled briefly into cryptography, managed code is the single largest bane of any language you can name. Unmanaged code also prods the coder to pay a hell of a lot more attention to what they are doing, to make sure they get things right, because getting anything wrong can lead to catastrophic failure, particularly in languages that have even less managed code libraries than VB6. So is VB6 the best language ever? No, but there are certainly a significant amount of more "modern" languages around that are significantly worse. Sure you could write some unsafe code in VB6, but if you are any good at it, you can write "unsafe code" that does the job it was written for, does it correctly, and is faster than the "managed code". In short, before anyone starts ranting about how bad a language is, learn the compiler properly, learn the loop holes, the does and the don't. You'll be happier, more productive code monkeys. When speed and accuracy is of prime importance to your application, unmanaged code is king. Quit with the hand holding that are managed libraries and learn to code properly.
-
Pete O'Hanlon wrote:
make developing business applications quick.
That what you say - but in 1999 when we went to Microsoft they sold us VB6 to develop the new version of our ERP. It was catastrophic... It was a group - so-called - specialist in distributed network applications (they called it DNALab), and they almost ruined our reputation with that suggestion... So the fact that even Microsoft didn't know for what VB is good, but they tried it on everyone without mercy... X|
I'm not questioning your powers of observation; I'm merely remarking upon the paradox of asking a masked man who he is. (V)
So the problem was the people and not the language. MS fell victim to the same mentality as many large consultancies and tried body shopping where they'd drop a star programmer in to win the bid and, as soon as they had got the work, they'd drag that poor sap off to repeat the same process in other companies. It's known as bait and switch. You cannot blame the language for poor management practice. I've seen many fine programs written in VB6, in just the same was as I've seen many poor ones.
-
So the problem was the people and not the language. MS fell victim to the same mentality as many large consultancies and tried body shopping where they'd drop a star programmer in to win the bid and, as soon as they had got the work, they'd drag that poor sap off to repeat the same process in other companies. It's known as bait and switch. You cannot blame the language for poor management practice. I've seen many fine programs written in VB6, in just the same was as I've seen many poor ones.
Pete O'Hanlon wrote:
So the problem was the people and not the language.
It more was like Juno - two faced problem. People that try to sell you something that does not fit...
I'm not questioning your powers of observation; I'm merely remarking upon the paradox of asking a masked man who he is. (V)
-
:-D There was a time when it was a cool language, and I have made quite a bit money writing VB6 Applications. So I can't complain. And on the other hand after using it for few years and earning money, I failed to understand that why my university taught me C++, or why we even need it. But then C# happen... :laugh:
Remind Me This - Manage, Collaborate and Execute your Project in the Cloud
-
I come from teh dark side. My mission is completed. VB6 shall rule all of you in sometime. We will conquer you all. BWA HA HA
Nahin c programming best
-
Pete O'Hanlon wrote:
So the problem was the people and not the language.
It more was like Juno - two faced problem. People that try to sell you something that does not fit...
I'm not questioning your powers of observation; I'm merely remarking upon the paradox of asking a masked man who he is. (V)
I'm pretty sure the language would have fit. As I said, it's having people who don't know what they are doing that is generally the problem. There have been many ERP implementations that used VB6 and they seemed to be able to cope admirably. The problem is, it's easy to knock VB because it's looked down on and derided as a toy language by "serious" developers, and this is just a crass attitude. Unfortunately, this infantile behaviour has carried over from VB6 through to the VB.NET world and I can understand why we don't get many VB developers on CodeProject - because we have a self styled elite pouring scorn on them.
-
I'm pretty sure the language would have fit. As I said, it's having people who don't know what they are doing that is generally the problem. There have been many ERP implementations that used VB6 and they seemed to be able to cope admirably. The problem is, it's easy to knock VB because it's looked down on and derided as a toy language by "serious" developers, and this is just a crass attitude. Unfortunately, this infantile behaviour has carried over from VB6 through to the VB.NET world and I can understand why we don't get many VB developers on CodeProject - because we have a self styled elite pouring scorn on them.
I can't agree more about that 'elite' behavior around - X|! Also about VB6 and VB.NET - they are a different... But believe me! I went to Microsoft every day for over 6 months. Their professionals worked with me all day long to build the base of our new system - it doesn't worked out - and in that case it was because of VB6...
I'm not questioning your powers of observation; I'm merely remarking upon the paradox of asking a masked man who he is. (V)
-
I realise I may get flamed for this, and I am mentally prepared for it, but VB6 was not as bad as people make it out to be. Sure it was not the best language for much of anything, but it is not as bad as people make it out to be. .NET was far worse, and I would even go as far as to say that C# is more shoddy than VB6 ever was or ever will be. Now before the flaming starts hear me out. I personally would class VB6 as an intermediary language, sure there was a lot more managed libraries than C++ will ever have, but the amount of managed code in VB6 pales in comparison to the amount of managed code in .NET or C#. As someone who has dabbled briefly into cryptography, managed code is the single largest bane of any language you can name. Unmanaged code also prods the coder to pay a hell of a lot more attention to what they are doing, to make sure they get things right, because getting anything wrong can lead to catastrophic failure, particularly in languages that have even less managed code libraries than VB6. So is VB6 the best language ever? No, but there are certainly a significant amount of more "modern" languages around that are significantly worse. Sure you could write some unsafe code in VB6, but if you are any good at it, you can write "unsafe code" that does the job it was written for, does it correctly, and is faster than the "managed code". In short, before anyone starts ranting about how bad a language is, learn the compiler properly, learn the loop holes, the does and the don't. You'll be happier, more productive code monkeys. When speed and accuracy is of prime importance to your application, unmanaged code is king. Quit with the hand holding that are managed libraries and learn to code properly.
Seems like you wrote that trying to attract a flame. For most things managed code is 'coding properly', particularly with an intelligent garbage collection algorithm and large memory spaces. C#/.Net applications get very close in speed to a correctly coded C++ equivalent. An environment where "getting anything wrong can lead to catastrophic failure" is not better.
-
Depends on each image you create. Our System Admins just uncheck the .NET Framework option during install..
The signature is in building process.. Please wait...
-
Seems like you wrote that trying to attract a flame. For most things managed code is 'coding properly', particularly with an intelligent garbage collection algorithm and large memory spaces. C#/.Net applications get very close in speed to a correctly coded C++ equivalent. An environment where "getting anything wrong can lead to catastrophic failure" is not better.
No it's not better, but it does teach you to be better coders because you are paying a lot more attention to what you are doing as opposed to letting the managed code do it for you. In many instances the managed code is also slower, see my cryptography example. But I do agree with you that managed code does suit most instances. I was being very specific with the example.
-
So the problem was the people and not the language. MS fell victim to the same mentality as many large consultancies and tried body shopping where they'd drop a star programmer in to win the bid and, as soon as they had got the work, they'd drag that poor sap off to repeat the same process in other companies. It's known as bait and switch. You cannot blame the language for poor management practice. I've seen many fine programs written in VB6, in just the same was as I've seen many poor ones.
Well said. I have had many years of happy VB6 programming - and still use it. It has 'issues' - name me a language that doesn't (on second thoughts don't). VB6 is good at some things - bad at lots of others. If you are in its sweet spot it can be very productive.
-
Shirley that's VB.net, VB6 had the wonderful
Option Explicit. Where I used to work it was hanging offence to not include that one.Don't forget
Option Base[^], just to mess with anyone who tries to understand your arrays.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer
-
d@nish wrote:
No. It is not. Just kidding.
You must be VB programmer! April Fool's day isn't until tomorrow. Marc
