Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. Other Discussions
  3. The Insider News
  4. A primer on why the chronic suffering of the VB.NET community is neither necessary nor a matter of expense or practicality

A primer on why the chronic suffering of the VB.NET community is neither necessary nor a matter of expense or practicality

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Insider News
csharptutorialdiscussion
5 Posts 4 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • K Offline
    K Offline
    Kent Sharkey
    wrote on last edited by
    #1

    Anthony D. Green[^]:

    Time and time again I see the discussion of Microsoft’s level of investment in VB.NET framed around the same faulty assumption: it’s just too darned expensive and impractical for Microsoft to support two .NET languages

    How to create (or destroy) a dev community

    And even if VB isn't your favourite language, I think it's still a great read as it applies to other "off the narrow path" technologies and languages that may fall off the support trains.

    M B 2 Replies Last reply
    0
    • K Kent Sharkey

      Anthony D. Green[^]:

      Time and time again I see the discussion of Microsoft’s level of investment in VB.NET framed around the same faulty assumption: it’s just too darned expensive and impractical for Microsoft to support two .NET languages

      How to create (or destroy) a dev community

      And even if VB isn't your favourite language, I think it's still a great read as it applies to other "off the narrow path" technologies and languages that may fall off the support trains.

      M Offline
      M Offline
      Mark_Wallace
      wrote on last edited by
      #2

      How he managed to write that without swearing is beyond me.

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

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • K Kent Sharkey

        Anthony D. Green[^]:

        Time and time again I see the discussion of Microsoft’s level of investment in VB.NET framed around the same faulty assumption: it’s just too darned expensive and impractical for Microsoft to support two .NET languages

        How to create (or destroy) a dev community

        And even if VB isn't your favourite language, I think it's still a great read as it applies to other "off the narrow path" technologies and languages that may fall off the support trains.

        B Offline
        B Offline
        Bohdan Stupak
        wrote on last edited by
        #3

        Quote:

        it’s just too darned expensive and impractical for Microsoft to support two .NET languages

        I guess this is the reason why F# will never be as big for .NET community as Scala for Java community.

        Z 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • B Bohdan Stupak

          Quote:

          it’s just too darned expensive and impractical for Microsoft to support two .NET languages

          I guess this is the reason why F# will never be as big for .NET community as Scala for Java community.

          Z Offline
          Z Offline
          ZevSpitz
          wrote on last edited by
          #4

          Isn't the author saying this is a faulty assumption? > Time and time again I see the discussion of Microsoft’s level of investment in VB.NET framed around the same faulty assumption: it’s just too darned expensive and impractical for Microsoft to support two .NET languages (ignoring the fact that they actually make three); it would take an army of developers and content writers at great expense nearly duplicating all effort across the ecosystem at worst or perhaps 10-30% of the (Developer Tools) division resources at best. Today I want to put that misconception to rest. If I understand correctly, the author is arguing precisely that it is not too expensive or impractical for Microsoft to support two .NET languages, or even three .NET languages. If there was enough interest in F#, Microsoft could make it as big as Scala.

          B 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • Z ZevSpitz

            Isn't the author saying this is a faulty assumption? > Time and time again I see the discussion of Microsoft’s level of investment in VB.NET framed around the same faulty assumption: it’s just too darned expensive and impractical for Microsoft to support two .NET languages (ignoring the fact that they actually make three); it would take an army of developers and content writers at great expense nearly duplicating all effort across the ecosystem at worst or perhaps 10-30% of the (Developer Tools) division resources at best. Today I want to put that misconception to rest. If I understand correctly, the author is arguing precisely that it is not too expensive or impractical for Microsoft to support two .NET languages, or even three .NET languages. If there was enough interest in F#, Microsoft could make it as big as Scala.

            B Offline
            B Offline
            Bohdan Stupak
            wrote on last edited by
            #5

            I think you've understood it correctly. Just in case I was not challenging the faultiness of this assumption anywhere in my post. Just ranting a bit that F# is underestimated too :)

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            Reply
            • Reply as topic
            Log in to reply
            • Oldest to Newest
            • Newest to Oldest
            • Most Votes


            • Login

            • Don't have an account? Register

            • Login or register to search.
            • First post
              Last post
            0
            • Categories
            • Recent
            • Tags
            • Popular
            • World
            • Users
            • Groups