Dumb VB and C++ fact of the Day

Mark_Wallace

I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!

realJSOP

stepan hakobyan wrote:

Please don't be so harsh with VB.

VB sucks in all of its evil incarnations. That's as un-harsh as I can be.

stepan hakobyan wrote:

I'm working in business automation industry and my day to day languages are C#, TypeScript, VB.

I'd like to show some sympathy or your plight, but you've no doubt had plenty of opportunities to remedy that situation, but you persist in exposing yourself to VB, so I'm not sure how you think I should react.

stepan hakobyan wrote:

Imho VB is the most effective for writing business login.

That's just crazy talk right there.

".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013

realJSOP

ZevSpitz wrote:

I'm curious to know why you feel that way about VB.NET

Because the name starts with "VB".

ZevSpitz wrote:

which can express virtually everything that C# can; and like other .NET languages can make use of (almost all of) the types in the .NET Framework.

The words "virtually" and "almost" should be indicators for you...

ZevSpitz wrote:

There are obviously various small differences (VB.NET allows inferring the delegate type, allows assigning a numeric string to a number, etc.)

"Inferring" and being typeless do not make VB a better idea. Unless you're a commie... or liberal...

".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013

grralph1

Yes they were. Both VB.Net 13.0 and C++ 13.0 were ready for release in VS 2014 code name Dev 13. However it only worked on Windows 9. Windows 9 release was killed by Windows 10 which was released midway through 2015. So VS 2014, VB.Net 13.0, C++ 13.0 and Windows 9 were effectively all fake news. There is a reason for everything.

"Rock journalism is people who can't write interviewing people who can't talk for people who can't read." Frank Zappa 1980

Chris C B

Some facts: ;P 1. I am not a liberal or commie - in fact I think Atilla the Hun and Genghis Kahn were lily-livered pinko-liberal pooftahs. 2. I have written lots and lots of VB.NET - and got paid for it. :cool: 3, I have a 50 foot yacht in the marina. Sadly, the marine police have removed my small armoury therefrom until such time as I leave. Your move! :laugh: :laugh:

Sander Rossel

That's the only dumb VB fact you have? :laugh:

Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Continuous Integration, Delivery, and Deployment arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly

atverweij

Another VB fact: I am retired on a tropical island in the Caribbean after 25 years of VB /VB.Net programming :) Who's next?

atverweij

Another fact: SAP has dedicated it's version 13 of Crystal reports to Visual studio, making it's normal release 14 without official skipping 13 :-D

realJSOP

A fact you missed: 0) Real programmers know enumerated lists start with 0.

".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013

realJSOP

I'm not retired because I'm busy replacing VB-based crap-ware with C#.

".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013

atverweij

So I got the money using VB and you got the crap and problems using C#. Who did better?

Richard Deeming

ZevSpitz wrote:

I'm curious to know why you feel that way about VB.NET

ZevSpitz wrote:

VB.NET allows ... assigning a numeric string to a number

I think you've just answered your own question there! :-D (Option Strict and Option Explicit should always be On. IMO, there shouldn't even be an option to turn them off.)

"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined." - Homer

atverweij

And 3 facts you missed: 0. Real programmers don't care what language they use; because they are able to solve the problem in any language. 1. Smart programmers solve the problem in the way it is the least work and pays the most. 2. Really good programmers won't be used on projects where they have to fix the crap of someone else (that's where juniors are for).

atverweij

Yes, they should always be on. But C# still has the GoTo statement. But that doesn't mean you have to use it :-D

realJSOP

Richard Deeming wrote:

IMO, there shouldn't even be an option to turn them off.)

All of this is presuming that VB should be allowed to exist in the first place.

".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013

atverweij

Then stop financing its makers - oh wait, they build C# too .... Oh wait again - its even the same compiler and toolset ....

realJSOP

I did stop funding them. The last thing I bought from Microsoft was a MSDN subscription a number of years ago. That got me Windows 7 and VS2013. Recently, I migrated almost completely away from Microsoft at home. I still have a VM running Win7 so I can write Windows code with VS2017 community), but that's it.

".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013

atverweij

Then there is only one thing left to do: find a job where you don't have to work with Microsoft either. If I see your rant, it would be really better for your heart.

atverweij

I still do some projects - just for fun. So If you want, I can enlighten your burden and take the project from you. That is - if it pays enough of course.

kalberts

As a general rule, people showing the kind of hashness as you do, toward one tool (or standard, or whatever) tend to have a poor understanding of how to use it. Or they consider it out of its intended scope of usage. A number of years ago, I switched jobs, from a Solaris environment to a non-*nix-environment: I really never made friends with Solaris. Nor with the company standard editor emacs. I made both crash quite regularly. More than once, I demonstrated to my colleauges what I had been doing. They looked over my shoulder, and screamed out: Hey, you mustn't do THAT! What the h** did you do that for? Well, I did it to show you how I made Solaris crash (or emacs)... This happened several times, and every time they made me the cruel sinner who didn't know to behave, and ruined their concept of Solaris as the worlds most rock solid OS. Well, it was - as long as you didn't do anything that could make it crash... In my new job, they were running a different OS (this was before Windows became the only alternative; it was in mincomputer/supermini area), which crashed several times a day. The Unix educated sysops did everything to make Sintran III appear as if it were Unix. I happened to know Sintran III well, so, as a left hand job, I became sort of sysops supervisor, telling them the proper way to maintain a Sintran III machine. I spent a week or two cleaning up the procedures. Three months later, some people were still complaining about the frequent crashes, and I had to drag them over to show them the system logs: The system hadn't had a single stop for three months. Systems, languages, methods ... may be severely misused, abused, used in inappropriate ways or for inappropriate purposes. That doesn't mean the poor abused thing is evil, despisable or even bad. What you could say is that "X is not suitable for application Y, because it lacks a suitable way of doing A, B and C" (maybe it does have a provision, but for reasons 1, 2 and 3, that provision does not fulfill our requirements). Any system, language or method that is widely used, is well suited for a certain class of tasks. Otherwise it wouldn't have been widely used. There may be other tools that would also be satisfactory. If you went into those environments using the tool you hate, presenting your arguments, you might learn that you hate reasons are not valid there. E.g. lots of software people argue for open source, but lots of tool users would never ever consider looking at the source code of the tool. Or cost: You may