VB & C++ Topic Ealier Got Me Thinking...
-
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
It doesn't just reflect the root, it reflects the targetted audience.
Not according to Microsoft.
-
Yes, it is, now go troll somewhere else.
-
Yes, it is, now go troll somewhere else.
It has been well documented how Microsoft regretted naming it basic; the "professional" thingy was there to convince people that it was not "just" for beginners. It is not trolling, just history. And me disliking the concept does not make VB6 any less of a succes. --edit I would be extremely happy if one of my applications had 10% the success of VB6 :thumbsup:
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.
-
VB6 doesn't have proper builtin support for multithreading, but that doesn't mean you can't. You can: FreeVBCode code snippet: A Thread to Visual Basic: Multi-Threading In VB5 and VB6[^] But as they say: Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should.
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello
If you've ever been touching a language with proper threading support built into the language from the very beginning design stage, you would completely reject the "multithreading support" that has been added to the C class of languages more like a cancerous growth; it is not at all any neatly integrated element of the language, as it ought to be. (You could say the same about e.g. exception handling.) Those who bitch at VB, should have something better to come up with than C. (My first choice would be CHILL, but that language never made its way out of the telephone switches where it was born - which is a pity, because it had really nice thread handling and synchronization mechanisms, as well as very good exception handling mechanisms.)
-
Thats the thing that worries me, I mean a language for Beginners used for big systems, not an issue...
Yeah, and an language developed for implementing a space invasion game, with a multiprocess concept designed for enabling the attacking space ships to come closer and closer as you were pondering what to do next, a user interface created for you to shoot down the alien attackers... Languages, operating systems and command processors sometimes have origins that shouldn't make you proud.
-
The B does not stand for BASIC, but for "BEGINNERS". With C++ and Delphi there were enough alternatives. VB6 was Access on steroids. VB.NET is born from that. --edit Who in their right mind would risc the existence of their enterprise by allowing VB-code?
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.
-
Just don't see the point, C++ I would not trust to bloat... also class, pah! struct...
-
At what time? I did my first BASIC programming in 1975. I don't remember anything about C++ and Delphi from those days.
-
For my 60th birthday earlier this year I had a T-shirt made wiht the text: "You don's have to be SENILE to be DEMENTED ... but it sure helps!" (In Norwegian, as well in several other European languages, "senile" has been adopted as a short form of "senile dementia" in informal speech, although the "senile" means nothing but "old" - medical services classifies anyone of 60 years and older as senile.) I did my first Basic programming as a high school exchange student in Minnesota: A huge Univac 1100 mainframe was set up in the Twin Cities, with 440 modems for use by 1500 schools all over the state. My school couldn't afford a "high speed" 300 bps modem; we had just a standard 110 bps one. But in those days, Basic provided only 286 numeric variables, named A-Z and A0-A9...Z0-Z9, and 26 strings named A$-Z$. So by character count, programs were small and compact!
-
I do see the point. There is no bloat, unless you explicitely put it in.
C++is multi paradigm: you may also use it effectively just as 'betterC'. As matter of fact I welcome the introduction ofC++inPIC32microcontrollers code development. -
I programmed in Amstrad CPC 6128 (#Griff #signature) in BASIC, and this basic has nothing to do with VB6. It was _really_ for beginners. I would not describe VB6 as good performing, but there was some point of time where it was one of the only choices available with a great compatibility with MSOffice tools. Actually, the success of it probably came from the Macro tools in Office, before it was a thing on its own, even when I am not 100% sure of what I am stating.
VBA (what drives the macros in office) was VB6 embedded in Office, VB6 came first. VBA is Visual Basic for Applications.
-
Hi All, VB was (is?) seen as the quickest way to write Windows apps. I came to Windows from the embedded side, really reading data coming in via various ports and showing in Windows. VB6 was the quickest way as the company was run by a Micro-Sharft consultant. But there was Borland's C++ Builder and Delphi as well, BASIC was seen as the go to language for kids in my day I started with BBC Basic and C came with the Amiga... I was a little shocked to find BASIC being used in the wild...
Our principal application is almost 2 million lines of VB.Net. As a c# developer I was hesitant but it really is just about getting your head around a more verbose syntax and several months to break the semi-colon and curly braces habit! Wherever possible, I still prefer c# as it feels more grown up. The biggest issue is finding engineers willing to work with VB.Net - the second you mention VB the phone goes dead... :)
Keep your friends close. Keep Kill your enemies closer. The End
-
At what time? I did my first BASIC programming in 1975. I don't remember anything about C++ and Delphi from those days.
Member 7989122 wrote:
At what time? I did my first BASIC programming in 1975. I don't remember anything about C++ and Delphi from those days.
That might be due to Windows being created 10 years later. Same for GW-BASIC, 1985. Even Turbo Pascal is from 1983. With "at the time" I'm obviously referencing to the period in which Visual Basic 6 was actively sold by MS, not the dawn of mankind where we just invented fire.
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.
-
My point was that the users do not reflect the language.
-
Sure, a C++ compiler can compile your source code using only the plain C subset of C++. The question is: Are you then develping in C, or in C++?
-
Hi All, VB was (is?) seen as the quickest way to write Windows apps. I came to Windows from the embedded side, really reading data coming in via various ports and showing in Windows. VB6 was the quickest way as the company was run by a Micro-Sharft consultant. But there was Borland's C++ Builder and Delphi as well, BASIC was seen as the go to language for kids in my day I started with BBC Basic and C came with the Amiga... I was a little shocked to find BASIC being used in the wild...
Nice flame war! :laugh: A nice reminder of the VB shaming that exists here. :( As a solo developer the choice between C# and VB is dependent on one thing only: Which one am I the most productive in? it all boils down to the same MSIL anyway and my clients don't care. Now, back to the VB shaming. (since it's Saturday) It seems that haters will hate. The same old weak arguments regurgitated to prove why their beloved C# is superior and VB is trash and not worthy for serious work...or that programmers who prefer (or are stuck with) VB are inferior and should be scorned and ridiculed. I think as a community, we can do better than to get all evangelical about something so petty. I don't have a dog in this fight...I like them both equally...just a tool to get a job done.
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
