Looking for a good C# to VB.NET converter
-
Surely refactoring is an IDE feature that VB.NET could have just as easily ? Iterators are cool, but I'd agree with you in putting anonymous methods at the bottom of the list. I'm waiting to see if I become enthusiastic about them, right now, I am not. Giancarlo Aguilera wrote: despite managed extensions having gone down the toilette Well, that is good news. I always said they would. On what do you base the statement though ? I've never seen them taken up in any meaningful way, nor did I expect them to. Christian I have several lifelong friends that are New Yorkers but I have always gravitated toward the weirdo's. - Richard Stringer
cg wrote: "Surely refactoring is an IDE feature that VB.NET could have just as easily ?" sure it could have, but there wasn't enough time. A big deal? Of course! Is there a workaround? Sure, third party to the rescue!!!!!!!!!! cg wrote: "Well, that is good news. I always said they would. On what do you base the statement though ? I've never seen them taken up in any meaningful way, nor did I expect them to." I make the statement solely based on the fact that when you go to the ms sight and take a look at what's new in c++ in 2.0, the only mention of managed extensions is that they're being replaced by CLI. I hope CLI will stick, for the c++ programmer's sake. he deserves better, he also deserves being able to develop asp.net apps with it and not limited to just windows forms.
-
jw wrote: "Hey if you spend your life learning a system and then they try to yank the rug from underneath you, well you are likely to stomp on that rug and try to pull it back, if there is a good reason. I don't know if C#.Net is better, but considering the time it took me to get familiar with MSVC++, I very much doubt if I am going to give up without a struggle" I won't argue against your point, rather reinforce it. It must be tough having spent so much time learning and using c++ to now have all this .net hype in your face. i've said this a thousand times before, c++ is a much more difficult language, one that has investment far superior to any other language, and MS knows this and that's why MFC is still strong, despite managed extensions having gone down the toilette. I feel for you, and I applaud your courage to stick with c++, although you loose nothing and gain everything by using it in the managed world if you must. Being able to delete your objects when you want wherever you want, being able to use multiple inheritance to implement temporary throw away bridges, all that is totally awesome and only available in c++. from a pure language standpoint whether c# is better than vb, at least in version 1.1, i can assure it's not, although in 2.0 c# has a language edge at least for me with its support for, in order of importance to me, 1) refactoring, 2) iterators, 3) native language support for nullable types, and 4) anonymous methods, although be very careful how you use these, for you could end up with some horrible memory and performance issues if not used carefully. jw wrote: "If this is just corporate shenigans to make make money off of a new system then I am sure as sugar going to pull back." of course it's about money, it's always about money, and that's a good thing, let market forces do there thing. jw wrote: " The executables are huge" the executables are huge, sure they are, but remember you're dealing with meta data filled assemblies, not binary code, at least not until the JIT compiler does its magic, and this is a good. all this meta data expressed in the form msil is why .net components can interact seamlessly, why you can create a base class in c# in one assembly and derive another class from it in vb from from a different assembly with total ease, although in COM it wasn't that difficult to implements an interface exposed by another component either. if you want a smaller footprint, try creating a native image of the asssembly and see if that brings the size down. i
Personally I work with graphics which is highly computationaly expensive. Moving to an obviously slower system is just plain stupid, despite the all the hype. I have even seen some people try to convince me that the very thing that C# is extremely bad at - namely large numbers of calculation in floating point. No dice. Make it compile properly into native code, and I will use it. That has always been MS's strength - fusing the hardware to the software, and making sure it worked and was accessible - I have no idea why they abandoned this idea. Targeting a specific operating system and hardware and promoting that system - while putting all your eggs in one basket - has served them well in the past. Until then, at least in my opinion, it is just another toy for the computer scientists and fanatics.
Every nation ridicules other nations, and all are right. - Schopenhauer
-
cg wrote: "Surely refactoring is an IDE feature that VB.NET could have just as easily ?" sure it could have, but there wasn't enough time. A big deal? Of course! Is there a workaround? Sure, third party to the rescue!!!!!!!!!! cg wrote: "Well, that is good news. I always said they would. On what do you base the statement though ? I've never seen them taken up in any meaningful way, nor did I expect them to." I make the statement solely based on the fact that when you go to the ms sight and take a look at what's new in c++ in 2.0, the only mention of managed extensions is that they're being replaced by CLI. I hope CLI will stick, for the c++ programmer's sake. he deserves better, he also deserves being able to develop asp.net apps with it and not limited to just windows forms.
Giancarlo Aguilera wrote: A big deal? Of course! Is there a workaround? Sure, third party to the rescue!!!!!!!!!! That's my point - it's not a language feature, and it can be resolved. Giancarlo Aguilera wrote: the only mention of managed extensions is that they're being replaced by CLI. Cool. I didn't know that, so thanks for the info. Giancarlo Aguilera wrote: I hope CLI will stick, for the c++ programmer's sake. he deserves better Well, the average C++ programmer doesn't want to interop his code with .NET, and is smart enough to learn C# in an afternoon for ASP.NET work :-) Christian I have several lifelong friends that are New Yorkers but I have always gravitated toward the weirdo's. - Richard Stringer
-
Personally I work with graphics which is highly computationaly expensive. Moving to an obviously slower system is just plain stupid, despite the all the hype. I have even seen some people try to convince me that the very thing that C# is extremely bad at - namely large numbers of calculation in floating point. No dice. Make it compile properly into native code, and I will use it. That has always been MS's strength - fusing the hardware to the software, and making sure it worked and was accessible - I have no idea why they abandoned this idea. Targeting a specific operating system and hardware and promoting that system - while putting all your eggs in one basket - has served them well in the past. Until then, at least in my opinion, it is just another toy for the computer scientists and fanatics.
Every nation ridicules other nations, and all are right. - Schopenhauer
Actually, I work a lot with graphics, and image processing, and I've found C# fast enough for everything that we do. What sort of work do you do ? Christian I have several lifelong friends that are New Yorkers but I have always gravitated toward the weirdo's. - Richard Stringer
-
I've found that dumb managers often want VB.NET because they percieve that it's easier, and therefore easier to find other programmers who can use it. This will change, and in fact, we're having no trouble converting clients to C#, simply by showing them our work and telling them we refuse to work in VB.NET, unless they pay double. Christian I have several lifelong friends that are New Yorkers but I have always gravitated toward the weirdo's. - Richard Stringer
-
Well, I still think the VB community is going to slowly shrink/stay at current levels while C# is going to keep growing. Hopefully in a few years VB will be in the same place that COBOL is now.
I can imagine the sinking feeling one would have after ordering my book, only to find a laughably ridiculous theory with demented logic once the book arrives - Mark McCutcheon
andy brummer wrote: Hopefully in a few years VB will be in the same place that COBOL is now. And where is that, exactly? Have you ever used COBOL professionally (or at all)? Or are you just jumping on the "COBOL is old, so it must be useless" bandwagon?
-
Personally I work with graphics which is highly computationaly expensive. Moving to an obviously slower system is just plain stupid, despite the all the hype. I have even seen some people try to convince me that the very thing that C# is extremely bad at - namely large numbers of calculation in floating point. No dice. Make it compile properly into native code, and I will use it. That has always been MS's strength - fusing the hardware to the software, and making sure it worked and was accessible - I have no idea why they abandoned this idea. Targeting a specific operating system and hardware and promoting that system - while putting all your eggs in one basket - has served them well in the past. Until then, at least in my opinion, it is just another toy for the computer scientists and fanatics.
Every nation ridicules other nations, and all are right. - Schopenhauer
"Personally I work with graphics which is highly computationaly expensive. Moving to an obviously slower system is just plain stupid, despite the all the hype. " with all due respect, i don't think you're understanding my point, nor i'm i trying to convince you to switch to .net, for i really could care less. furthermore, you don't realize how lucky you are, given the language you have the option to use. in all likelihood, you can continue doing all your fancy computational work, as is, and if need be, your language allows you to expose all of this to the managed world, like I said, if need be, simply by implementing the adapter pattern by creating a managed wrapper around your native code. "Make it compile properly into native code, and I will use it. That has always been MS's strength - fusing the hardware to the software, and making sure it worked and was accessible - I have no idea why they abandoned this idea. Targeting a specific operating system and hardware and promoting that system - while putting all your eggs in one basket - has served them well in the past. " None of that has changed, I think you need to read up on the JIT compiler. One of the advantages of the JIT compiler is that it will compile an assembly differently based on various factors, including hardware and software present on the machine at the time of compile. so assembly x on pc w98 with 128mb of ram will most likely not jit compile exactly as it would on pc xp with 1gb of ram in the end, all the power to you brother, if you don't have to program in the managed world using a managed language, good for you, but to say that the managed world is no good only because of performance, that's not good enough of a premise to the argument, for the premise can easily be negated by the fact that most applications are not graphically or computationally intensive, although for those that are, you're right, c++ is king.
-
Hey if you spend your life learning a system and then they try to yank the rug from underneath you, well you are likely to stomp on that rug and try to pull it back, if there is a good reason. I don't know if C#.Net is better, but considering the time it took me to get familiar with MSVC++, I very much doubt if I am going to give up without a struggle. If this is just corporate shenigans to make make money off of a new system then I am sure as sugar going to pull back. The executables are huge, the IDE is certainly no improvement, and the main argument for is that it standardizes typical functions into a platform independent, cross-language object is just not good enough for me personally to move all of my code into this new improved system. It is also slow as Hell with same idiotic problems that Java had. These are 3Ghz machines what more do they need? Slowwwww. Good God, what is happening under the hood here?
just to clear up a mistake in my prior response to you when I said: "being able to use multiple inheritance to implement temporary throw away bridges" actually what I meant is: "being able to use multiple inheritance to implement temporary throw away adapters" sorry for the mistake, i get my patterns mixed up once in a while
-
CG wrote: "ROTFL. Actually, I thought you generated my standard list of comments about VB.NET. Wasn't it you who pointed out that an empty string == Nothing in VB.NET, etc. ? I found out that functions invent their own return value on my own....." precisely, you needed someone else's premises for your argument. Never said it was perfect, but as long as patterns are implementable and you're getting good money doing it, why not? besides its only getting better in 2.0m with some exception, which I can list for you so that you can continue moaning and groaning. CG wrote: "You took C++ classes, but you've never coded in it ? How does THAT work ?" Never had to, nor was asked to VB 6 did it all, and where it didn't, pulled out the wallet and bought some awesome tools. Why fight it? CG wrote: "As I recall, last time I said that VB sucks, you took it incredibly personally. I've never said that all VB.NET programmers are idiots ( although the majority of VB.NET code I've seen was plainly written by idiots )." CG: "This could well be the case, because C#, like VB6 and VB.NET, definately is easy enough for a newbie programmer to feel they know what they are doing, just because their code does not crash. But for now the truly terrible code seems to be more in the VB.NEt end of the field" let time takes its toll, ch, ch, ch, changes!!!!!!!!!!! Already apologized for that, because like I said, it's not my style, yet it sure is your style to insult people. you've obviously got issues that go beyond programming. CG wrote: "This is plain stupid. edit and continue existed in VC6, and intellisence has always been there. C# is growing to be more like C++ with the addition of things like templates. I don't really like anonymous methods, but iterators rock, and templates should have been there from the beginning." you can honestly say with a straight face that VC6's edit and continue was like VB's? CG: "Why ? We did it before, you not only agreed with some of my points, but provided a further list of reasons that C# kills VB.NET. Go back and reread it, it'll have the same effect." Why you ask? Why not, it's fun, and I currently having nothing to do besides playing, production is complete!
Giancarlo Aguilera wrote: Never had to, nor was asked to VB 6 did it all, and where it didn't, pulled out the wallet and bought some awesome tools. Why fight it? Not to make too much of an issue out of it, but some of us don't have the cash to buy our way out of corners a less-than-ideal dev tool has painted us into. If i'm gonna get paid to code, i'm best off minimizing my expenses... :) First language i learned was BASIC. Moved on because hardware access was such a pain. Sad to see that with all the improvements made to software since then, we've only managed to create another barrier to use.
Shog9
I'm not the Jack of Diamonds... I'm not the six of spades. I don't know what you thought; I'm not your astronaut...
-
andy brummer wrote: Hopefully in a few years VB will be in the same place that COBOL is now. And where is that, exactly? Have you ever used COBOL professionally (or at all)? Or are you just jumping on the "COBOL is old, so it must be useless" bandwagon?
I know quite a few COBOL developers that maintain applications that do more then $20 million dollars of buisness every day. In fact my first real application dealt with connecting a web application to a COBOL application server on a Tandem mainframe. COBOL is as dead as FORTRAN. They occupy specific niches and aren't used outside of those areas. That is why I didn't say that VB was going to die, because there will be people maintaining VB applications for a long time. I just don't think it will maintain it's position as the most popular windows buisness and web application language. Heck, I even subscribe to the blog of one of the Foxpro developers because he has a really interesting perspective on windows development.
I can imagine the sinking feeling one would have after ordering my book, only to find a laughably ridiculous theory with demented logic once the book arrives - Mark McCutcheon
-
You must have started out in the science field. I did some good work in FORTRAN just hated allocation of memory in predefined blocks. And those functions that took large number of arguments, or those idiots that define every variable using the first letter. In SGI and Sun machines it was possible to allocate memory dynamically, but it was platform dependent. Jeez now look at us. Templates, and you don't even have to worry about swap space or the size of static memory. Ah, those wer the days.
Every nation ridicules other nations, and all are right. - Schopenhauer
Yep - was a physicist, engineer and defence researcher for a while so had my fair share of FORTRAN. My favourite were the variables named X, XX, XXY and XXX. Oh, and column 6. Dynamic memory? We used to dream of dynamic memory. The solution the guys used was that when the program failed due to memory overflow they would increase the array sizes and recompile. I spent 3 years trying to convince one lot to move to C++ but it was just all too hard. cheers, Chris Maunder
-
I know quite a few COBOL developers that maintain applications that do more then $20 million dollars of buisness every day. In fact my first real application dealt with connecting a web application to a COBOL application server on a Tandem mainframe. COBOL is as dead as FORTRAN. They occupy specific niches and aren't used outside of those areas. That is why I didn't say that VB was going to die, because there will be people maintaining VB applications for a long time. I just don't think it will maintain it's position as the most popular windows buisness and web application language. Heck, I even subscribe to the blog of one of the Foxpro developers because he has a really interesting perspective on windows development.
I can imagine the sinking feeling one would have after ordering my book, only to find a laughably ridiculous theory with demented logic once the book arrives - Mark McCutcheon
andy brummer wrote: he has a really interesting perspective on windows development. "We're all going to Hell in a Handbasket"? cheers, Chris Maunder
-
Christian Graus wrote: they both compile to IL, however the C# compiler creates faster code Are you sure? I know C++ generates more optimized IL, but I have never heard that C# should make more efficient IL than VB.NET. - Anders Bill's Bar
My PhotosWDevs - The worlds first DSP, free blog space, email and more. Now also with forums :)
I have friends on the CLR and C# team and according to them, the C# compiler creates better optimized code. 'Course they might be biased :) Cheers, Tom Archer - Archer Consulting Group Programmer Trainer and Mentor and Project Management Consultant
-
I know quite a few COBOL developers that maintain applications that do more then $20 million dollars of buisness every day. In fact my first real application dealt with connecting a web application to a COBOL application server on a Tandem mainframe. COBOL is as dead as FORTRAN. They occupy specific niches and aren't used outside of those areas. That is why I didn't say that VB was going to die, because there will be people maintaining VB applications for a long time. I just don't think it will maintain it's position as the most popular windows buisness and web application language. Heck, I even subscribe to the blog of one of the Foxpro developers because he has a really interesting perspective on windows development.
I can imagine the sinking feeling one would have after ordering my book, only to find a laughably ridiculous theory with demented logic once the book arrives - Mark McCutcheon
It's interesting to hear someone with low level C++ and algorithm experience getting pumped about a product like visual foxpro. Some of the posts have been about creating compressed indexes from the low memory DOS days to optimizing memory alocation algorithms based on a graphical memory allocation display he built using foxpro, or how they built garbage collection into the application using foxpro database tables. :wtf:
I can imagine the sinking feeling one would have after ordering my book, only to find a laughably ridiculous theory with demented logic once the book arrives - Mark McCutcheon
-
Well, if I was getting work in VB.NET, that would be the case, but instead I'm getting what I really want - the client converts to C#. Christian I have several lifelong friends that are New Yorkers but I have always gravitated toward the weirdo's. - Richard Stringer
-
It's interesting to hear someone with low level C++ and algorithm experience getting pumped about a product like visual foxpro. Some of the posts have been about creating compressed indexes from the low memory DOS days to optimizing memory alocation algorithms based on a graphical memory allocation display he built using foxpro, or how they built garbage collection into the application using foxpro database tables. :wtf:
I can imagine the sinking feeling one would have after ordering my book, only to find a laughably ridiculous theory with demented logic once the book arrives - Mark McCutcheon
andy brummer wrote: It's interesting to hear someone with low level C++ and algorithm experience getting pumped about a product like visual foxpro. Some of the posts have been about creating compressed indexes from the low memory DOS days to optimizing memory alocation algorithms based on a graphical memory allocation display he built using foxpro, or how they built garbage collection into the application using foxpro database tables. Link, please! :-D Vikram.
http://www.geocities.com/vpunathambekar "Argue for your limitations, and sure enough, they're yours." – Richard Bach, "Illusions".
-
I've found that dumb managers often want VB.NET because they percieve that it's easier, and therefore easier to find other programmers who can use it. This will change, and in fact, we're having no trouble converting clients to C#, simply by showing them our work and telling them we refuse to work in VB.NET, unless they pay double. Christian I have several lifelong friends that are New Yorkers but I have always gravitated toward the weirdo's. - Richard Stringer
Christian Graus wrote: telling them we refuse to work in VB.NET, unless they pay double. Are you implying VB.net coders should be paid more than C# devs? :mad: ;P Vikram.
http://www.geocities.com/vpunathambekar "Argue for your limitations, and sure enough, they're yours." – Richard Bach, "Illusions".
-
Christian Graus wrote: telling them we refuse to work in VB.NET, unless they pay double. Are you implying VB.net coders should be paid more than C# devs? :mad: ;P Vikram.
http://www.geocities.com/vpunathambekar "Argue for your limitations, and sure enough, they're yours." – Richard Bach, "Illusions".
LOL - heaven forbid. As I suspect you've realised ( from the smiley ), I want danger money before I rot my brain with VB Christian I have several lifelong friends that are New Yorkers but I have always gravitated toward the weirdo's. - Richard Stringer
-
andy brummer wrote: It's interesting to hear someone with low level C++ and algorithm experience getting pumped about a product like visual foxpro. Some of the posts have been about creating compressed indexes from the low memory DOS days to optimizing memory alocation algorithms based on a graphical memory allocation display he built using foxpro, or how they built garbage collection into the application using foxpro database tables. Link, please! :-D Vikram.
http://www.geocities.com/vpunathambekar "Argue for your limitations, and sure enough, they're yours." – Richard Bach, "Illusions".
http://weblogs.asp.net/calvin_hsia/[^]
I can imagine the sinking feeling one would have after ordering my book, only to find a laughably ridiculous theory with demented logic once the book arrives - Mark McCutcheon
-
Can anybody recommend a good C# to VB.NET converter that can convert entire C# projects? I tried several and none of them produce code that can compile. I need to automate converting several thousand lines of code on a regular basis. Manual tweaking is not an option.
you could try this link: http://www.kamalpatel.net/ConvertCSharp2VB.aspx[^] hope it helps. Goodluck!