(Again) Visual Basic.NET Exceeded C# Popularity in TIOBE in October 2018 And it is Raising
-
It still has
On Error Resume Next
- so it's still garbage. A popularity contest does not guarantee quality: look at the current POTUS ...Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640 Never throw anything away, Griff Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay... AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
OriginalGriff wrote:
It still has
On Error Resume Next
- so it's still garbage.Which is really just the same as:
try
{
throw new Exception();
}
catch {}Perfectly valid (and seen) in C#. Please tell me how this makes C# garbage :D
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Continuous Integration, Delivery, and Deployment arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
-
I'm probably one of those unfortunate that had a manager who felt an urge to develop enterprise level in VB... From your post I can conclude you are not in the same boat... The day you will be curious enough to check how TIOBE's index built, you will understand how it is useless and on the same day you will understand how VB is limited...
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge". Stephen Hawking, 1942- 2018
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote:
From your post I can conclude you are not in the same boat my manager...
FTFY :laugh:
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote:
you will understand how VB is limited
It's pretty much the same as C# though. Although lately it hasn't been given the same attention as C#. It works the same for .NET, but I don't even think .NET Core supports VB. As far as I'm concerned that's Microsoft telling us VB is still supported, but not further developed. Anyway, that's not really the language's fault...
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Continuous Integration, Delivery, and Deployment arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
-
OriginalGriff wrote:
It still has
On Error Resume Next
- so it's still garbage.Which is really just the same as:
try
{
throw new Exception();
}
catch {}Perfectly valid (and seen) in C#. Please tell me how this makes C# garbage :D
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Continuous Integration, Delivery, and Deployment arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
No, it isn't. It's the same as saying:
void MyMethod()
{
try { ALineOfCode(); } catch{}
try { AnotherLineOfCode(); } catch{}
try { AndAnotherLineOfCode(); } catch{}
try { YetAnotherLineOfCode(); } catch{}
try { NextLineOfCode(); } catch{}
try { YetMoreLineOfCode(); } catch{}
try { EvenNowALineOfCode(); } catch{}
try { EvenNowAnotherLineOfCode(); } catch{}
}And if you saw that on a code review you'd start swearing! :laugh: Worse, it propagates through subfunctions until another
On Error
is met - so you may never know that your code failed a hundred calls deep. It just continues as if the error line had not existed until it becomes totally impossible to ignore by which time the actual source of the error well and truly forgotten; the method may not even be in the call stack any more! And by then your DB is horribly corrupt ...Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640 Never throw anything away, Griff Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay... AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
-
No, it isn't. It's the same as saying:
void MyMethod()
{
try { ALineOfCode(); } catch{}
try { AnotherLineOfCode(); } catch{}
try { AndAnotherLineOfCode(); } catch{}
try { YetAnotherLineOfCode(); } catch{}
try { NextLineOfCode(); } catch{}
try { YetMoreLineOfCode(); } catch{}
try { EvenNowALineOfCode(); } catch{}
try { EvenNowAnotherLineOfCode(); } catch{}
}And if you saw that on a code review you'd start swearing! :laugh: Worse, it propagates through subfunctions until another
On Error
is met - so you may never know that your code failed a hundred calls deep. It just continues as if the error line had not existed until it becomes totally impossible to ignore by which time the actual source of the error well and truly forgotten; the method may not even be in the call stack any more! And by then your DB is horribly corrupt ...Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640 Never throw anything away, Griff Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay... AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
I've seen pretty much exactly that at one of the companies I worked at. Ok, it wasn't every line of code, but every method at least (and sometimes multiple per method). And yes, it was VB.NET (but no On Error Resume Next, it only had a few of those) :sigh: And you're right about the swearing part :laugh:
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Continuous Integration, Delivery, and Deployment arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
-
I've seen pretty much exactly that at one of the companies I worked at. Ok, it wasn't every line of code, but every method at least (and sometimes multiple per method). And yes, it was VB.NET (but no On Error Resume Next, it only had a few of those) :sigh: And you're right about the swearing part :laugh:
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Continuous Integration, Delivery, and Deployment arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
Yeah - it's the equivalent of saying "my code works because it has no compiler errors" and walking away. :laugh:
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640 Never throw anything away, Griff Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay... AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
-
Yeah - it's the equivalent of saying "my code works because it has no compiler errors" and walking away. :laugh:
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640 Never throw anything away, Griff Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay... AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
You're saying that like there's an alternative ;p My credo in software development is "if it compiles, ship it!"
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Continuous Integration, Delivery, and Deployment arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
-
I'm probably one of those unfortunate that had a manager who felt an urge to develop enterprise level in VB... From your post I can conclude you are not in the same boat... The day you will be curious enough to check how TIOBE's index built, you will understand how it is useless and on the same day you will understand how VB is limited...
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge". Stephen Hawking, 1942- 2018
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote:
...you will understand how VB is limited...
You assertion is a lie. C# and VB.NET are equivalent languages!! See: VB.NET and C# Comparison (2016)[^]
Sorry to use large fonts, but I guess you did not read it the first time :-D -
Popular with non-programmers.
Minion no. 5 wrote:
Popular with non-programmers.
C# language is at the #6 position in that index, Java #1, Python #4... they are not programmers? Tiobe Index is the most popular comparator of programming languages on the internet, it is cited by thousands of magazines and articles in many years.
-
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote:
...you will understand how VB is limited...
You assertion is a lie. C# and VB.NET are equivalent languages!! See: VB.NET and C# Comparison (2016)[^]
Sorry to use large fonts, but I guess you did not read it the first time :-DLexical part of the language is not all makes it a language... Try this in English:
Tavon a lúd átúsz, visszaúsz meg átúsz.
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge". Stephen Hawking, 1942- 2018
-
Of course it is popular; everyone can be a programmer with VB :) In other news, over 50% of projects fail. Your move :cool:
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^] "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Of course it is popular; everyone can be a programmer with VB
With C# too, with Python too (#4 position in Tiobe index) ... Everyone can be a programmer with (put your preferred language here). Bad argument.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
In other news, over 50% of projects fail.
Source?
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Your move :cool:
Done.
-
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Of course it is popular; everyone can be a programmer with VB
With C# too, with Python too (#4 position in Tiobe index) ... Everyone can be a programmer with (put your preferred language here). Bad argument.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
In other news, over 50% of projects fail.
Source?
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Your move :cool:
Done.
georani wrote:
Bad argument.
No, an old and valid one, and proven at that; most programmers that started as hobbyists used VB; a language that encourages bad constructs and minimizes the stuff the user has to know.
georani wrote:
Source?
Google it yourself, it is not like it is a secret.
georani wrote:
Done.
Make it serious, or don't attempt another one.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^] "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
-
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote:
From your post I can conclude you are not in the same boat my manager...
FTFY :laugh:
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote:
you will understand how VB is limited
It's pretty much the same as C# though. Although lately it hasn't been given the same attention as C#. It works the same for .NET, but I don't even think .NET Core supports VB. As far as I'm concerned that's Microsoft telling us VB is still supported, but not further developed. Anyway, that's not really the language's fault...
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Continuous Integration, Delivery, and Deployment arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
Sander Rossel wrote:
but I don't even think .NET Core supports VB.
Please see it: .NET Core 2.1 downloads for Linux, macOS, and Windows[^]
Released 10/2/2018
Release notes: Supports C# 7.3 Supports F# 4.5 **Supports Visual Basic 15.5**
Sander Rossel wrote:
Microsoft telling us VB is still supported, but not further developed.
You are wrong, please see this: .NET Core 3 and Support for Windows Desktop Applications (Winforms and WPF) | .NET Blog[^]
Article excerpt:
C#, F# and VB already work with .NET Core 2.0. You will be able to build desktop applications with any of those three languages with .NET Core 3.
-
People celebrate when their favorite language goes to top 10 in Tiobe Index, examples: Report: Swift Now Top 10 Language[^] (wow!) TypeScript finally joins the TIOBE top 100[^] (wow!) But VB.NET is raising in popularity in this same index: Visual Basic .NET Populatrity is Raising![^] Interesting that nobody talks about this: VB.NET was in #49 position in 2011 and now it is in #5 position (2018) I received a lot of criticism from people that do not know VB.NET when I made this comment here in CodeProject: Visual Basic.NET Exceeded C# Popularity in TIOBE in July 2018 [^] These people hate VB.NET. YES, after so many years VB.NET has surpassed C# in TIOBE Index (July 2018, August 2018, September 2018, October 2018) Visual Basic.NET is a great programming language, so powerful as C#, but more fun and readable to program with it. Visual Basic.NET IS NOT the classic VB (Old VB). VB.NET is like C# but a bit more verbose and almost like natural English, so anyone can understand VB.NET code. Current Month Ranking of Languages Popularity: www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/
georani wrote:
VB.NET is like C# but a bit more verbose and almost like natural English, so anyone can understand VB.NET code.
I always say that's a terrible analogy as spoken language has many nuances that a reader can only understand if provided enough context. You can write something useful with a programming language within a few days or even hours--minutes in some cases. You need weeks, if not months or even years, to become proficient with a spoken language. If that's how VB.NET's defenders choose to extol its virtues, then they're starting off on the wrong foot. I want my programming languages to clearly reflect the writer's intent without any guesswork. Comparing it with English is not how to sell a programming language to a developer. That's called dumbing it down to help those people not working in this field understand what's being discussed.
-
Sander Rossel wrote:
but I don't even think .NET Core supports VB.
Please see it: .NET Core 2.1 downloads for Linux, macOS, and Windows[^]
Released 10/2/2018
Release notes: Supports C# 7.3 Supports F# 4.5 **Supports Visual Basic 15.5**
Sander Rossel wrote:
Microsoft telling us VB is still supported, but not further developed.
You are wrong, please see this: .NET Core 3 and Support for Windows Desktop Applications (Winforms and WPF) | .NET Blog[^]
Article excerpt:
C#, F# and VB already work with .NET Core 2.0. You will be able to build desktop applications with any of those three languages with .NET Core 3.
Ok, so VB is or wasn't supported for .NET Core 1.x, Portable Framework, Unity, some Azure functionality... It seems VB always comes last for Microsoft, if at all. And then sometimes, someone, like you, comes along who loves VB and promises to make it all better and it gets a little bit better only for VB to fall behind again. Yeah, VB was my first language and as such it has a special place in my heart, but I wouldn't recommend VB as a career path for anyone. Programmers aren't using it, employers aren't asking for it. It only, somehow, has a high position in a weird TIOBE index.
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Continuous Integration, Delivery, and Deployment arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
-
georani wrote:
Bad argument.
No, an old and valid one, and proven at that; most programmers that started as hobbyists used VB; a language that encourages bad constructs and minimizes the stuff the user has to know.
georani wrote:
Source?
Google it yourself, it is not like it is a secret.
georani wrote:
Done.
Make it serious, or don't attempt another one.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^] "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
started as hobbyists used VB; a language that encourages bad constructs and minimizes the stuff the user has to know.
It is a lie, You're confounding Classic VB (1998, 20 years old language) with VB.NET (an C# equivalent language). See by yourself: VB.NET and C# Comparison (2016)[^]
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Google it yourself, it is not like it is a secret.
I did it, I have found not articles about 50% of VB.NET projects fails, again you are lying.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Make it serious, or don't attempt another one.
Done.
-
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
started as hobbyists used VB; a language that encourages bad constructs and minimizes the stuff the user has to know.
It is a lie, You're confounding Classic VB (1998, 20 years old language) with VB.NET (an C# equivalent language). See by yourself: VB.NET and C# Comparison (2016)[^]
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Google it yourself, it is not like it is a secret.
I did it, I have found not articles about 50% of VB.NET projects fails, again you are lying.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Make it serious, or don't attempt another one.
Done.
georani wrote:
I have found not articles about 50% of VB.NET projects fails, again you are lying.
No, he said 50% of "PROJECTS" fail, not "50% of VB.NET projects". And that statistic is true, though the number is not dead on accurate. Study: 68 percent of IT projects fail | ZDNet[^] 21 Shocking Project Management Statistics That Cost Business Owners Millions Each Year[^] When are you going to learn to read, without bias?
Asking questions is a skill CodeProject Forum Guidelines Google: C# How to debug code Seriously, go read these articles.
Dave Kreskowiak -
Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter wrote:
...you will understand how VB is limited...
You assertion is a lie. C# and VB.NET are equivalent languages!! See: VB.NET and C# Comparison (2016)[^]
Sorry to use large fonts, but I guess you did not read it the first time :-DThey are equivalent in the sense that they both target the .NET Framework. They are NOT statement-for-statement equivalent. Read Comparison of C Sharp and Visual Basic .NET - Wikipedia[^] There are features of both languages that you cannot use or find an equivalent for in the other.
Asking questions is a skill CodeProject Forum Guidelines Google: C# How to debug code Seriously, go read these articles.
Dave Kreskowiak -
They are equivalent in the sense that they both target the .NET Framework. They are NOT statement-for-statement equivalent. Read Comparison of C Sharp and Visual Basic .NET - Wikipedia[^] There are features of both languages that you cannot use or find an equivalent for in the other.
Asking questions is a skill CodeProject Forum Guidelines Google: C# How to debug code Seriously, go read these articles.
Dave Kreskowiak -
Dave Kreskowiak wrote:
They are equivalent in the sense that they both target the .NET Framework.
Not only this, They are equivalent in the sense that they both can do the same things with equivalent (almost) amount of code (amount of lines).
That is most assuredly not true. You would know this if you bothered to read the link I gave you. Again, when are you going to learn to read without bias?
Asking questions is a skill CodeProject Forum Guidelines Google: C# How to debug code Seriously, go read these articles.
Dave Kreskowiak -
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
started as hobbyists used VB; a language that encourages bad constructs and minimizes the stuff the user has to know.
It is a lie, You're confounding Classic VB (1998, 20 years old language) with VB.NET (an C# equivalent language). See by yourself: VB.NET and C# Comparison (2016)[^]
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Google it yourself, it is not like it is a secret.
I did it, I have found not articles about 50% of VB.NET projects fails, again you are lying.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Make it serious, or don't attempt another one.
Done.
georani wrote:
It is a lie, You're confounding Classic VB (1998, 20 years old language) with VB.NET (an C# equivalent language).
No, I'm not. Saying that VB.NET s a C# equivalent is nonsense; they target the same runtime, but so does managed C++. No one in their right mind would compare VB to C++, calling them equivalent. It implies that you could take a VB.NET programmer and drop him/her in an "equivalent" environment. You can't :thumbsup:
georani wrote:
I did it, I have found not articles about 50% of VB.NET projects fails, again you are lying.
I could offer help, but I'm weirdly enough not in a helpfull mood :)
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^] "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.