Is visual basic dead?
-
I feel like I've not seen any vb.net roles in some time.. Is it still being built or is it dead?
I'm on the verge of retiring and haven't built a new commercial system for ages; when I last did, I used C#, and a couple of hobby websites I'm using C#. But I'm also still supporting VB.Net stuff (including one large commercial system) and have even found a couple of 3rd parties who are happy to take over long-term support for it. If I need to knock up a proof-of-concept or a quick web utility for myself, I still find VB quicker than C#. And in work, I've yet to find anything I can't do in VB.Net that I can (and want to) do in C#. But I'm a bit of a Luddite anyway.
Telegraph marker posts ... nothing to do with IT Phasmid email discussion group ... also nothing to do with IT Beekeeping and honey site ... still nothing to do with IT
-
I feel like I've not seen any vb.net roles in some time.. Is it still being built or is it dead?
Not enough "samples". If you have to start somewhere (with MS), finding "working samples" (C#) is a big plus.
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
-
I've asked the Bing AI programming questions and I am thrilled with the absolute confidence with which it tells me bullshit
At least you can recongnise it is bullshit... I don't want to imagine how many wannabe coders are now copy+pasting from it and wondering why it doesn't work, which actually would be the best case, worst one is it compiles and works, but not as it should.
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
-
I queried it instead of Google. That's all that means. I rather like the summaries it generates, rather than following link after link which lead to questionable results.
-
I've asked the Bing AI programming questions and I am thrilled with the absolute confidence with which it tells me bullshit
-
I feel like I've not seen any vb.net roles in some time.. Is it still being built or is it dead?
I treated Basic with contempt in early days. Baffled by why people used VB6 when Delphi was so much more regular and productive. However, when I first saw VB, I was impressed - at last BASIC as a real programming language, However, there was also the wonderful C# that, to me, "looked like Java and smelled like Delphi".
-
I feel like I've not seen any vb.net roles in some time.. Is it still being built or is it dead?
-
I feel like I've not seen any vb.net roles in some time.. Is it still being built or is it dead?
imo VB6 died. And VBA , VB.NET are dying. And I am sad about it. The programming languages I have used most are VB6 and VBA. Even now, I use mainly VB6 and some VB.NET. I have NOT touched python and even C# Now, its for VB6 and VBA users to resurrect VB6 and keep VBA alive. Microsoft abandoned VB6 and will soon abandon VB.NET and even VBA. So those who like VB6, VBA etc will have to work to keep it alive
-
I feel like I've not seen any vb.net roles in some time.. Is it still being built or is it dead?
Started quite a few new project using vb.net. It is a cool, chilled language, more modern than the workhorse, Delphi 7. Used C# a lot before. As others pointed out, it is a C (as in cancer) type language driven into total chaos by the Cool Kids On The Codeblock. Release by release harder to follow the syntax incorporating things from All The Cool Languages. [Including from Dartmouth BASIC :)](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/csharp/whats-new/tutorials/top-level-statements)
-
I feel like I've not seen any vb.net roles in some time.. Is it still being built or is it dead?
Been using one flavor or another of Basic for most of my 30+ year career including VB6 and VB.Net but I’ve not touched it since 2021. I didn’t think I would like C# at first but now I can’t really imagine ever going back to VB. But I don’t think VB will ever completely die.
-
I feel like I've not seen any vb.net roles in some time.. Is it still being built or is it dead?
Short answer is Nope. I got flagged a couple of years ago on another forum for answering the same question about PHP. I said they would more than likely be dead before PHP :) That was apparently an offensive answer, lol. Of course, the difference between VB and PHP is that VB.net is a semi-commercial venture by Microsoft, so at the end of the day, it is their call regarding its existence. Codebase sizes for desktop apps are largely unknown with estimates being based on things like jobs and posted questions. While those two metrics have some relevance, they don't accurately depict the actual usage. For many of those applications, there's little difference between C# and VB. Heck, there's still a bunch of VB6 floating around that still does what it needs to do. Should it be? No, but it can be tough for some organizations to justify (or afford) the expense of converting to C# or even VB.net. I wouldn't answer this question as strongly as I did the PHP one. The web has become mature enough to handle more apps that were relegated to desktop roles and I've seen more movement in that direction.
-
I feel like I've not seen any vb.net roles in some time.. Is it still being built or is it dead?
I guess it depends on what you mean by "dead". I'm still using VB.NET for most things. It is my preferred language, although I also have one project in C# that I support. That being said, I'm a web developer, and Microsoft has pretty much screwed over VB.NET web developers. Very little of the ASP.NET Core things can be written in VB.NET. :-( Mostly the work I am doing is supporting existing WebForms applications so this hasn't been a big issue for me. But if I was building something new, I'd probably use RemObjects Mercury to take advantage of ASP.NET Core but still be able able to use VB. My clients generally don't care about the language choice, so I can choose whatever I prefer. I agree that I haven't seen many listed positions for VB.NET these days, although I'm not really looking much so I probably don't have a good feel for that. There is definitely a small contingent of folks who still love the language and are actively using it, but I suspect we are aging out. --Avonelle
-
I feel like I've not seen any vb.net roles in some time.. Is it still being built or is it dead?
VB enabled many people to learn to code on the job. Was that good or bad? Personally I see it as a win for some people to have gotten into IT Development as you no longer had to be a "computer scientist" to do so. But simultaneously, it made it almost "too easy" to write code, and is likely responsible for some horribly written monolithic systems that likely still exist today.
-
I feel like I've not seen any vb.net roles in some time.. Is it still being built or is it dead?
First, What is Visual Basic? We have VB (classic), VB-Script and VB (.Net) The first one (VB Classic)is dead - the last version was released in 1999. But it's coming back to live; google on TwinBasic and RadBasic. The second one is dying (VB-Script) - Microsoft is phasing out this version of VB. And I think that should have been done years ago, as it is only something to be used by Ransomware parties. The third one (VB.Net). Officially? It's alive. Really? It's dead as the language is not evolving anymore. But, just like for VB Classic, VB.Net is reviving. There is a second implementation (Mercury), OpenSilver is 100% supporting VB.Net, enabling VB to do Xaml, WebAssembly and mobile, and former head of VB, Anthony D. Green has started to take up the task of supporting the VB language, adding language structs and features. So, the answer is Yes and No. Depending on what you think VB is and if Microsoft support defines dead. As I see the projects outside Microsoft, VB classic and .Net both have a bright future. But if you want to depend on MS only, they are both dead.
-
I feel like I've not seen any vb.net roles in some time.. Is it still being built or is it dead?
-
Look, every coder I've known who knew one language and refused to ever use another was using vb6 or vb.net. so it costs nothing to keep the lights on but never built any extensions.
Christian Graus wrote:
every coder I've known who knew one language and refused to ever use another was using vb6 or vb.net
I certainly have known a few of those, but that is far more true in my experience with JavaScript programmers. Though a few decades ago, I remember a number of COBOL programmers like that, also. I did not understand the value of not moving forward.
-
I feel like I've not seen any vb.net roles in some time.. Is it still being built or is it dead?
I have been using Visual Basic since "classic" VB 1.0. I jumped to VB.net as soon as it was introduced. I know it like the back of my hand which allows me to get programming assignments done quickly. The thing I like most about this new "Microsoft is not updating VB anymore" policy is this means the language is stable. There's no chance of the latest update causing breaking changes in your line of business apps.
-
In .NET it makes no sense, there is only the CLR and C# is the sensible choice - many languages have C-like syntax, only VB has VB-like syntax. If they will ever make a native VB7 personally I will be if not the first adopter, the second. It's happening more and more that I need to put up a small interface for testing or an intelligent script with some graphic and swear against the useless complications imposed by the alternatives. I miss VB (but not
On Error Resiume Next).GCS/GE d--(d) s-/+ a C+++ U+++ P-- L+@ E-- W+++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- r+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X The shortest horror story: On Error Resume Next
den2k88 wrote:
In .NET it makes no sense, there is only the CLR and C# is the sensible choice
There is only one language in .NET - MSIL. Whether C#, F#, VB, or any of a number of other "syntactic sugar" .NET languages made by MS or third parties, the language processor is responsible for converting the language code to MSIL. If MS decides not to update the VB engine to convert to newer MSIL constructs, that is their choice. I use C# 99.99% of the time, so I have not used VB in a long time (outside occasional maintenance or conversion to C#). If there is not enough of a market to support extending VB when they extend C#, then it makes sense to start sunsetting it. Personally, I prefer the VB syntax over the archaic and unnecessary curly bracket and semicolon throwbacks to the last century, but they are second nature after 20 years. Besides, you can reference .NET libraries (whatever language they are written in) in VB (since they are compiled to MSIL), so the capabilities, if not the exact syntax, are available in VB if you want it.
-
I got serious about coding in 1999, and it was this site where I learned, I don't have a degree. So yes, it's been very helpful. I am 54
While I don't visit often these days, I consider this site instrumental to my professional success. In my late 20's and early 30's I basically learned industry programming by religiously reading all the latest CodeProject articles. I don't know that I could have transitioned from VB to C# without all the knowledge I assimilated from this site over that decade. I was so grateful that I even wrote a dozen or so articles myself, hoping to give something back to the community.
-
I'm on the verge of retiring and haven't built a new commercial system for ages; when I last did, I used C#, and a couple of hobby websites I'm using C#. But I'm also still supporting VB.Net stuff (including one large commercial system) and have even found a couple of 3rd parties who are happy to take over long-term support for it. If I need to knock up a proof-of-concept or a quick web utility for myself, I still find VB quicker than C#. And in work, I've yet to find anything I can't do in VB.Net that I can (and want to) do in C#. But I'm a bit of a Luddite anyway.
Telegraph marker posts ... nothing to do with IT Phasmid email discussion group ... also nothing to do with IT Beekeeping and honey site ... still nothing to do with IT
Here are some online .NET converters. [Convert C# to VB.NET - A free code conversion tool - developer Fusion](https://www.developerfusion.com/tools/convert/csharp-to-vb/) [Convert C# to Python - A free code conversion tool - developer Fusion](https://www.developerfusion.com/tools/convert/csharp-to-python/) [Convert C# to Ruby - A free code conversion tool - developer Fusion](https://www.developerfusion.com/tools/convert/csharp-to-ruby/) [Convert VB.NET to C# - A free code conversion tool - developer Fusion](https://www.developerfusion.com/tools/convert/vb-to-csharp/) [Convert VB.NET to Python - A free code conversion tool - developer Fusion](https://www.developerfusion.com/tools/convert/vb-to-python/) [Convert VB.NET to Ruby - A free code conversion tool - developer Fusion](https://www.developerfusion.com/tools/convert/vb-to-ruby/) And a VS extension [Code Converter (VB - C#) - Visual Studio Marketplace](https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=SharpDevelopTeam.CodeConverter) Even if not 100% perfect, at least it should take care of the bulk of it. There are also tools to convert VB6 to C#. A caveat, though. Beginning in VB4, object-oriented development was supported, and improved up through VB6. If the VB6 code was written in an object-oriented manner, the conversion should go easier. If the programmer retained the VB3 and earlier procedural programming style, then you will need to refactor and translate the code by hand. [Migrating VB6 Code to .NET 6? Here's a Tool -- Visual Studio Magazine](https://visualstudiomagazine.com/articles/2022/03/09/vb6-migration.aspx)