Why all the VB/C# flak?

[James T Johnson]

Paul Watson wrote: When VB first came out did C++ programmers diss it as well? (I have not been around for long enough to remember ) I wasn't around either. Back when VB4 had come out (sometime back in '95 since it had 16bit and 32bit support) I found VB1 for DOS on some warez site. If you take out the common controls and the data access, then port the interface to DOS, that was VB1. There have been some language changes and feature enhancements, but from what i remember thats all there was to it. It pretty much sucked compared to what we have now, but I think it was just right to hook me into continue programming :) Paul Watson wrote: BTW did you put it in the Lounge first and it was moved here, or did you put it here in the first place? I started to post it to the lounge, then by the time I finished it I realized this was a much better place for it. James Sonork ID: 100.11138 - Hasaki "Not be to confused with 'The VD Project'. Which would be a very bad pr0n flick. :-D" - Michael P Butler Jan. 18, 2002

[David Wengier]

James T. Johnson wrote: It pretty much sucked compared to what we have now, but I think it was just right to hook me into continue programming :) Me too. I was using QBasic, upgraded to QuickBasic (I can make .EXE files! :eek: ). Then found VB1 somehow, and was really taken by it. Treating a button as a "thing" (i didnt know the word Object then) just seemed to make sense to me. Then VB3 came out and I could make these .EXE files for Windows! :eek: :eek: And I am pretty sure that C++ programmers would have though that VB was a joke back then, yes. Just thinking of all the things you couldnt do with VB, I am sure they would have. I think it certainly is elitism. In the hands of the right person, VB6 is an amazing programming language. -- David Wengier

[Nish Nishant]

David Wengier wrote: VB6 is an amazing programming language. Hello David I think VB6 is very useful as a COM testing tool. Like if we are writing an ATL component, the best and fastest way, we can check whether the component works is using VB6. I mean all we need to do is :- dim a as object set a = createobject("abc.abc") msgbox a.somefunction(some parameters) Simple huh? I think that is VB6's greatest and most powerful use. I wonder how many C++ guys use VB6 to test their components! Nish Sonork ID 100.9786 voidmain www.busterboy.org If you don't find me on CP, I'll be at Bob's HungOut

[Nish Nishant]

C++ is like driving a manually geared automobile, C# is like driving an automatic gear vehicle and VB is like having a chauffeur. Nish Sonork ID 100.9786 voidmain www.busterboy.org If you don't find me on CP, I'll be at Bob's HungOut

[David Wengier]

Turn off Option Explicit and you only need two lines :) I am a VB person, not a C++ person, so I think it has a lot more uses, but each to his own. I have written one C++ windows app for Uni, but didnt like it. Just not my thing. I think I could have written it better in VB :) -- David Wengier

[David Wengier]

Nish [BusterBoy] wrote: and VB is like having a chauffeur yes, but if you want to, you can kick him out and drive off :) -- David Wengier

[James T Johnson]

My main use for VB in the past 2 years has been quick db frontends. The last one just exported data to a local access database from a remote SQL Server (used to store data for a data driven website). The only purpose for the local DB is so they can run reports off from it if they need to. James Sonork ID: 100.11138 - Hasaki "Not be to confused with 'The VD Project'. Which would be a very bad pr0n flick. :-D" - Michael P Butler Jan. 18, 2002

[Michael P Butler]

I tend to use VB for testing my ATL COM objects, mainly because I can get it up and running within a couple of minutes. I also use VB for proto-typing applications especially when I need a screenshot to go into the functional specification. Michael :-)

[Nish Nishant]

Yeah Its good for a rapid prototyping [non-functional of course] but with all the major screens Nish Sonork ID 100.9786 voidmain www.busterboy.org If you don't find me on CP, I'll be at Bob's HungOut

[MickAB]

Ok, let's try this reply again (I'm on a windows box now, so maybe this works) You stated the one reason for elitism is that C++ programmers think more pain == better engineer. My original comment is aimed at your oversimplification of the situation. (Chris Maunder)Because C++ is harder to learn to use than VB/C#, so programmers like to feel that because they have gone through more pain they are "better". It's the 'anything that hurts you makes you stronger' mentality. What I was trying to say was: more pain == more experience == better able to fix problems == a better programmer. Where is the contradiction? Do you disagree with the above statement? Please don't use sophistry Chris, of course the two statements are contradictory when taken out of context of the paragraph they are in. One of the best engineers I know doesn't have a "new" car, he built it himself. Hardly the same as your analogy, and he does treat _some_ sloppy programmers with disdain, as do I, whether they happen to use VB or not. Is that elitism, or pride in your work? ;P mfg, Mick

[Stan Shannon]

Chris, I must disagree with this. I think the "C++ programmers are masochists(sp?)" crowd have simply never worked on a really large application in a fast past entreprenuerial environment. C/C++ is best suited for that environment simply because you have to have tools which compensate for the fact that the specification/planning phase of the process is usually very short. VB (I'll withhold my judgement on C# but I really don't see how it could be better than C++) simply will not work in that kind of an environment. At some point the development of the application will become a kludge fest. When you have already written 50,000 lines of code, and you are being hit with a dozen new specifications a day and it is only two weeks before the thing is due to ship and you are working 15 hour days - you will thank god for C++. In other words, we need C++ because of bad management of the development process. The closer management comes to getting the process right, the more sense tools like VB make. The irony is that the bad managers, being bad, do not seem to understand this. It's a kind of Catch-22 - if the managers were good they would understand the need for C++, but if they were good there would be less need for C++! "Thank you, thank you very much" Elvis.

[Chris Maunder]

I was just trying to stir things up ;) but I've completely run out of energy (and enthusiasm) So would it be safe to say that those C++ programmers who treat VB programmers with disdain do it because C++ programmers generally have a better understanding of the underlying framework and so are better able to spot deficiencies in VB programs caused by either a lack of attention by the programmer or a lack of flexibility in the language? Or maybe because there are more flaky VB programs out there than flaky C++ programs (because VB buffers your mistakes, while C++ forces you to get it right else it'll all blow up?) Or is it because of the stereotypical grooming, dress sense and lifestyle differences between the two camps? cheers, Chris Maunder

[Anonymous]

dude where are u Sean Sp1@agere.com