I have noticed that there is ...
-
[Warning: Programming Rant] a lot of VB .Net bashing (with the lack of a better word). Yes, I agree that it is not as powerful or complex as the many high level programming languages, such as C++. Yes, you can nearly design everything in the form designer. But... If you do not know the language very well it is useless. Sure you can have one heck of a fancy form for the user, however, with no knowledge of the code, it is useless. I feel that VB .Net deserves more credit than what the language is currently given. Just because you can do everything inside of the Forms Designer, does not mean it is the most advantagous to do so. Object-Oriented VB .Net is possible - and useful at the same time. It can give the same results as C++ in most ways but in not all ways. Sure, C++ is more complex and more powerful (I never said it wasn't). [/Programming Rant] Phew, now that I got that out of my mind, I can go back to doing nothing. Weekends are great :-D. This wasn't pointed directly at anyone in particular, however, I have noticed there are some anti-vb comments on the discussion boards. (I'm not getting emotional either - just for the record ;P ) I don't by any means hate/dislike/be against/ect. anyone who dislikes VB .Net or VB .Net Programmers, I'd just like to know the reasons behind the dislikes. I hope this doesn't get me banned from CodeProject either :suss:. No offense intended by this post either. :-D What do you think? Is VB .Net still for complete programming idiots? Looking forward to some responses, Programmer2k4 My sig: "And it is a professional faux pas to pay someone else to destroy your computer when you are perfectly capable of destroying it yourself." - Roger Wright I now use my CodeProject Blog! Most recent blog post: March 24
Just for the record: 1. VB6 is better than VB.NET 2. VB.NET is better than C# 3. C# is the worst and most useless language I have had chance to work with - only Java is close. Have a nice weekend ;)
My programming blahblahblah blog. If you ever find anything useful here, please let me know to remove it.
-
Just for the record: 1. VB6 is better than VB.NET 2. VB.NET is better than C# 3. C# is the worst and most useless language I have had chance to work with - only Java is close. Have a nice weekend ;)
My programming blahblahblah blog. If you ever find anything useful here, please let me know to remove it.
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: Have a nice weekend Have a great weekend as well! :-D Thanks, Programmer2k4 My sig: "And it is a professional faux pas to pay someone else to destroy your computer when you are perfectly capable of destroying it yourself." - Roger Wright I now use my CodeProject Blog! Most recent blog post: March 24
-
Just for the record: 1. VB6 is better than VB.NET 2. VB.NET is better than C# 3. C# is the worst and most useless language I have had chance to work with - only Java is close. Have a nice weekend ;)
My programming blahblahblah blog. If you ever find anything useful here, please let me know to remove it.
Quite late, don't ya think? Today is 3rd April... David Never forget: "Stay kul and happy" (I.A.)
David's thoughts / dnhsoftware.org / MyHTMLTidy -
Quite late, don't ya think? Today is 3rd April... David Never forget: "Stay kul and happy" (I.A.)
David's thoughts / dnhsoftware.org / MyHTMLTidyI suppose you are talking about April Fools Day... Well, two days off isn't that bad... ;) Programmer2k4 My sig: "And it is a professional faux pas to pay someone else to destroy your computer when you are perfectly capable of destroying it yourself." - Roger Wright I now use my CodeProject Blog! Most recent blog post: April 3
-
I suppose you are talking about April Fools Day... Well, two days off isn't that bad... ;) Programmer2k4 My sig: "And it is a professional faux pas to pay someone else to destroy your computer when you are perfectly capable of destroying it yourself." - Roger Wright I now use my CodeProject Blog! Most recent blog post: April 3
Programmer2k4 wrote: I suppose you are talking about April Fools Day... of course Programmer2k4 wrote: Well, two days off isn't that bad... In my country, there will be 4th April in .. 3 minutes. Oh no, Monday! X| Never forget: "Stay kul and happy" (I.A.)
David's thoughts / dnhsoftware.org / MyHTMLTidy -
Quite late, don't ya think? Today is 3rd April... David Never forget: "Stay kul and happy" (I.A.)
David's thoughts / dnhsoftware.org / MyHTMLTidyI am dead serious. VB is bad, but C# is a disaster. See this presentation[^] by Bjarne Stroustrup: The dilemma is real •The most elegant languages –(e.g. Smalltalk, ML, Haskell, Common Lisp) –Are not applicable for many important application areas –Are not efficient for many important problems –Are apparently not manageable for most programmers •The most efficient languages –(e.g. C, C++, Fortran) –Encourage low-level messing/hacking –Have problems expressing some important problems elegantly –Are hard to “restrain”for reasoning/analysis/transformation •Many language are neither fish nor fowl –(e.g. Java and C#) –Neither elegant nor efficient –Not applicable for many important application areas
My programming blahblahblah blog. If you ever find anything useful here, please let me know to remove it.
-
I am dead serious. VB is bad, but C# is a disaster. See this presentation[^] by Bjarne Stroustrup: The dilemma is real •The most elegant languages –(e.g. Smalltalk, ML, Haskell, Common Lisp) –Are not applicable for many important application areas –Are not efficient for many important problems –Are apparently not manageable for most programmers •The most efficient languages –(e.g. C, C++, Fortran) –Encourage low-level messing/hacking –Have problems expressing some important problems elegantly –Are hard to “restrain”for reasoning/analysis/transformation •Many language are neither fish nor fowl –(e.g. Java and C#) –Neither elegant nor efficient –Not applicable for many important application areas
My programming blahblahblah blog. If you ever find anything useful here, please let me know to remove it.
Oh, I thoght the posts were one over to the left...I was talking about my post - not your post. (This topic may seem as an April Fools joke, but it really isn't) The link doesn't work on my computer. It must need a certain app that I don't have. (I said it was an interesting link after reading your quotes from your post. I guess I don't spend enough time clicking on the links.) Sorry for the confusion on my part. :-O Programmer2k4 My sig: "And it is a professional faux pas to pay someone else to destroy your computer when you are perfectly capable of destroying it yourself." - Roger Wright I now use my CodeProject Blog! Most recent blog post: April 3
-
I am dead serious. VB is bad, but C# is a disaster. See this presentation[^] by Bjarne Stroustrup: The dilemma is real •The most elegant languages –(e.g. Smalltalk, ML, Haskell, Common Lisp) –Are not applicable for many important application areas –Are not efficient for many important problems –Are apparently not manageable for most programmers •The most efficient languages –(e.g. C, C++, Fortran) –Encourage low-level messing/hacking –Have problems expressing some important problems elegantly –Are hard to “restrain”for reasoning/analysis/transformation •Many language are neither fish nor fowl –(e.g. Java and C#) –Neither elegant nor efficient –Not applicable for many important application areas
My programming blahblahblah blog. If you ever find anything useful here, please let me know to remove it.
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: C# is a disaster I am writing in C# for about two years - however I never noticed that C# is inefficient or not elegant - of course C# is not perfect - otherwise there wouldn't be 2.0 :) Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: See this presentation[^] hmm what browser I have to use to be impressed with something more than blank page? Doesn't work neither in FF or IE :( Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: –Neither elegant nor efficient efficient - in what terms? elegant - again, in what cases it's not "elegant"? Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: Not applicable for many important application areas true. C# is not meant to be langage for everything. It's a RAD tool. David Never forget: "Stay kul and happy" (I.A.)
David's thoughts / dnhsoftware.org / MyHTMLTidy -
I am dead serious. VB is bad, but C# is a disaster. See this presentation[^] by Bjarne Stroustrup: The dilemma is real •The most elegant languages –(e.g. Smalltalk, ML, Haskell, Common Lisp) –Are not applicable for many important application areas –Are not efficient for many important problems –Are apparently not manageable for most programmers •The most efficient languages –(e.g. C, C++, Fortran) –Encourage low-level messing/hacking –Have problems expressing some important problems elegantly –Are hard to “restrain”for reasoning/analysis/transformation •Many language are neither fish nor fowl –(e.g. Java and C#) –Neither elegant nor efficient –Not applicable for many important application areas
My programming blahblahblah blog. If you ever find anything useful here, please let me know to remove it.
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: See this presentation[^] by Bjarne Stroustrup: I don't quite see how it backs up the statement "C# is a disaster". Granted, C# is a lesser language than C++, as C++ is a more complete language1. However, I don't see how C# is a disaster, if performance isn't your #1 concern. 1 C++ has more intrinsic features than C#. If anyone wishes to argue about this, please learn C++ first. -- Oneigaishimasu! I blog too now[^]
-
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: C# is a disaster I am writing in C# for about two years - however I never noticed that C# is inefficient or not elegant - of course C# is not perfect - otherwise there wouldn't be 2.0 :) Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: See this presentation[^] hmm what browser I have to use to be impressed with something more than blank page? Doesn't work neither in FF or IE :( Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: –Neither elegant nor efficient efficient - in what terms? elegant - again, in what cases it's not "elegant"? Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: Not applicable for many important application areas true. C# is not meant to be langage for everything. It's a RAD tool. David Never forget: "Stay kul and happy" (I.A.)
David's thoughts / dnhsoftware.org / MyHTMLTidydnh wrote: otherwise there wouldn't be 2.0 Oh yes there would. Nothing is static, everything changes in time. A "perfect" language is only perfect for a specific set of problems. Add new problems, and the language isn't perfect anymore. A good language always tries to adress the problems at hand now and not 20 year old problems. :) -- Oneigaishimasu! I blog too now[^]
-
dnh wrote: otherwise there wouldn't be 2.0 Oh yes there would. Nothing is static, everything changes in time. A "perfect" language is only perfect for a specific set of problems. Add new problems, and the language isn't perfect anymore. A good language always tries to adress the problems at hand now and not 20 year old problems. :) -- Oneigaishimasu! I blog too now[^]
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: A "perfect" language is only perfect for a specific set of problems. Amen. I only had hard time to quickly find what's wrong with C# :) Never forget: "Stay kul and happy" (I.A.)
David's thoughts / dnhsoftware.org / MyHTMLTidy -
I am dead serious. VB is bad, but C# is a disaster. See this presentation[^] by Bjarne Stroustrup: The dilemma is real •The most elegant languages –(e.g. Smalltalk, ML, Haskell, Common Lisp) –Are not applicable for many important application areas –Are not efficient for many important problems –Are apparently not manageable for most programmers •The most efficient languages –(e.g. C, C++, Fortran) –Encourage low-level messing/hacking –Have problems expressing some important problems elegantly –Are hard to “restrain”for reasoning/analysis/transformation •Many language are neither fish nor fowl –(e.g. Java and C#) –Neither elegant nor efficient –Not applicable for many important application areas
My programming blahblahblah blog. If you ever find anything useful here, please let me know to remove it.
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: C# is a disaster That's your opinion, which seems to be based on the opinion of someone who only likes C++. I consider C# a great combination of C++ and Java. I believe in using the right tool for the job, and for ASP.NET development, C# is it. Regards, Alvaro
Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is. -- GWB, 1999.
-
[Warning: Programming Rant] a lot of VB .Net bashing (with the lack of a better word). Yes, I agree that it is not as powerful or complex as the many high level programming languages, such as C++. Yes, you can nearly design everything in the form designer. But... If you do not know the language very well it is useless. Sure you can have one heck of a fancy form for the user, however, with no knowledge of the code, it is useless. I feel that VB .Net deserves more credit than what the language is currently given. Just because you can do everything inside of the Forms Designer, does not mean it is the most advantagous to do so. Object-Oriented VB .Net is possible - and useful at the same time. It can give the same results as C++ in most ways but in not all ways. Sure, C++ is more complex and more powerful (I never said it wasn't). [/Programming Rant] Phew, now that I got that out of my mind, I can go back to doing nothing. Weekends are great :-D. This wasn't pointed directly at anyone in particular, however, I have noticed there are some anti-vb comments on the discussion boards. (I'm not getting emotional either - just for the record ;P ) I don't by any means hate/dislike/be against/ect. anyone who dislikes VB .Net or VB .Net Programmers, I'd just like to know the reasons behind the dislikes. I hope this doesn't get me banned from CodeProject either :suss:. No offense intended by this post either. :-D What do you think? Is VB .Net still for complete programming idiots? Looking forward to some responses, Programmer2k4 My sig: "And it is a professional faux pas to pay someone else to destroy your computer when you are perfectly capable of destroying it yourself." - Roger Wright I now use my CodeProject Blog! Most recent blog post: March 24
Programmer2k4 wrote: a lot of VB .Net bashing (with the lack of a better word). Really ? That's TERRIBLE. Who did that ? We should tar and feather them immediately. Programmer2k4 wrote: I feel that VB .Net deserves more credit than what the language is currently given. Yeah, I agree. It's a great way for non programmers to get a pretty window on the screen, no doubt about it. Programmer2k4 wrote: Is VB .Net still for complete programming idiots? Well, here's the real problem. VB.NET initially was a nice .NET language implimentation using VB syntax. Then all the VB6 users got up in arms about all the hacks they were going to lose, so the quality of the language eroded. Put simply - VB.NET and C# do the same thing, as far as the machine is concerned. As far as the programmer is concerned, C# is cleaner, neater, and better designed. Also, the majority of people using VB.NET are moving from VB6, a known breeding ground for ignorance. In the old world, one group of people asked 'what's the best way to program', and one asked 'what's the easiest way to program'. Those in one camp moved from C++ to C#, if necessary ( it was for me, ASP.NET rocks ). Those in the other camp are grudgingly moving from VB6 to VB.NET and signing petitions that Microsoft continue to support VB6 because they, unlike me, are scared to learn a 'new' language. There are good VB programmers and bad C++ programmers. The difference is that code from a bad VB programmer will probably still compile and do something, which makes it far more dangerous. Christian I have several lifelong friends that are New Yorkers but I have always gravitated toward the weirdo's. - Richard Stringer
-
[Warning: Programming Rant] a lot of VB .Net bashing (with the lack of a better word). Yes, I agree that it is not as powerful or complex as the many high level programming languages, such as C++. Yes, you can nearly design everything in the form designer. But... If you do not know the language very well it is useless. Sure you can have one heck of a fancy form for the user, however, with no knowledge of the code, it is useless. I feel that VB .Net deserves more credit than what the language is currently given. Just because you can do everything inside of the Forms Designer, does not mean it is the most advantagous to do so. Object-Oriented VB .Net is possible - and useful at the same time. It can give the same results as C++ in most ways but in not all ways. Sure, C++ is more complex and more powerful (I never said it wasn't). [/Programming Rant] Phew, now that I got that out of my mind, I can go back to doing nothing. Weekends are great :-D. This wasn't pointed directly at anyone in particular, however, I have noticed there are some anti-vb comments on the discussion boards. (I'm not getting emotional either - just for the record ;P ) I don't by any means hate/dislike/be against/ect. anyone who dislikes VB .Net or VB .Net Programmers, I'd just like to know the reasons behind the dislikes. I hope this doesn't get me banned from CodeProject either :suss:. No offense intended by this post either. :-D What do you think? Is VB .Net still for complete programming idiots? Looking forward to some responses, Programmer2k4 My sig: "And it is a professional faux pas to pay someone else to destroy your computer when you are perfectly capable of destroying it yourself." - Roger Wright I now use my CodeProject Blog! Most recent blog post: March 24
Programmer2k4 wrote: Is VB .Net still for complete programming idiots? No. It's the other way around. VB creates programming idiots out of perfectly teachable, albeit inexperienced, programmers. This is an important distinction. We forget that we all (or almost all of us) have programmed in some sort of B language at one point or another. The lucky ones were able to mature out of their programming childhood. In other words, VB is like a bad parent. It can really screw up your childhood. Marc MyXaml Advanced Unit Testing YAPO
-
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: See this presentation[^] by Bjarne Stroustrup: I don't quite see how it backs up the statement "C# is a disaster". Granted, C# is a lesser language than C++, as C++ is a more complete language1. However, I don't see how C# is a disaster, if performance isn't your #1 concern. 1 C++ has more intrinsic features than C#. If anyone wishes to argue about this, please learn C++ first. -- Oneigaishimasu! I blog too now[^]
C# is a disaster: takes the worst part of C++ (syntax) without inheriting its main strengths: static type system, RAII, performance, flexibility. The only good thing I can say about C# is that it is easy to learn if you already know C++ or Java. C# may be a good fit for web development (although web developers I know prefer even more dynamic languages, like PHP, Perl, VBScript, Python...) but for complex desktop apps and libraries it is a disaster. Even MFC is better, although I thought MFC was the worst thing ever - at least with MFC the applications can run fast enough. For the NLP libraries I work on, C# is a punishment: the stupid thing creates a new object on heap whenever a string needs to be changed (just don't mention the brain-damaged concept of StringBuilder), and in no time all the memory is gone and GC starts in the middle of processing. It makes Pentium 4 with 1G RAM crawl. Oh, and what about all this casting up and down? Geez, I learned 10 years ago that a cast is often a sign of an error in design - with C# you need to cast all the time. Anyway, I think I am done with C# for a while, and I am thankful for that. A horrible experience.
My programming blahblahblah blog. If you ever find anything useful here, please let me know to remove it.
-
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: See this presentation[^] by Bjarne Stroustrup: I don't quite see how it backs up the statement "C# is a disaster". Granted, C# is a lesser language than C++, as C++ is a more complete language1. However, I don't see how C# is a disaster, if performance isn't your #1 concern. 1 C++ has more intrinsic features than C#. If anyone wishes to argue about this, please learn C++ first. -- Oneigaishimasu! I blog too now[^]
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: C++ has more intrinsic features than C#. Amen to that :-) Christian I have several lifelong friends that are New Yorkers but I have always gravitated toward the weirdo's. - Richard Stringer
-
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: C# is a disaster That's your opinion, which seems to be based on the opinion of someone who only likes C++. I consider C# a great combination of C++ and Java. I believe in using the right tool for the job, and for ASP.NET development, C# is it. Regards, Alvaro
Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is. -- GWB, 1999.
Agreed - ASP.NET is C#'s killer app, by a long shot. Christian I have several lifelong friends that are New Yorkers but I have always gravitated toward the weirdo's. - Richard Stringer
-
C# is a disaster: takes the worst part of C++ (syntax) without inheriting its main strengths: static type system, RAII, performance, flexibility. The only good thing I can say about C# is that it is easy to learn if you already know C++ or Java. C# may be a good fit for web development (although web developers I know prefer even more dynamic languages, like PHP, Perl, VBScript, Python...) but for complex desktop apps and libraries it is a disaster. Even MFC is better, although I thought MFC was the worst thing ever - at least with MFC the applications can run fast enough. For the NLP libraries I work on, C# is a punishment: the stupid thing creates a new object on heap whenever a string needs to be changed (just don't mention the brain-damaged concept of StringBuilder), and in no time all the memory is gone and GC starts in the middle of processing. It makes Pentium 4 with 1G RAM crawl. Oh, and what about all this casting up and down? Geez, I learned 10 years ago that a cast is often a sign of an error in design - with C# you need to cast all the time. Anyway, I think I am done with C# for a while, and I am thankful for that. A horrible experience.
My programming blahblahblah blog. If you ever find anything useful here, please let me know to remove it.
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: C# is a disaster: takes the worst part of C++ (syntax) without inheriting its main strengths: static type system, RAII, performance, flexibility. Actually, C# reminds me a lot more of Java than C++. Granted, Java can look a good bit like C++, but they both steal shamelessly from C (which i'll refer to here as "the second greatest language ever to exist", since we're basing all this on personal taste anyway) in the syntax department. Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: Geez, I learned 10 years ago that a cast is often a sign of an error in design Bah, that's C++ talk, that is. Any C programmer worth his salt knows: when in doubt, cast to void* and deal with it later... Design is for high-level concepts like algorithms and blame, not petty syntax details.
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...
-
C# is a disaster: takes the worst part of C++ (syntax) without inheriting its main strengths: static type system, RAII, performance, flexibility. The only good thing I can say about C# is that it is easy to learn if you already know C++ or Java. C# may be a good fit for web development (although web developers I know prefer even more dynamic languages, like PHP, Perl, VBScript, Python...) but for complex desktop apps and libraries it is a disaster. Even MFC is better, although I thought MFC was the worst thing ever - at least with MFC the applications can run fast enough. For the NLP libraries I work on, C# is a punishment: the stupid thing creates a new object on heap whenever a string needs to be changed (just don't mention the brain-damaged concept of StringBuilder), and in no time all the memory is gone and GC starts in the middle of processing. It makes Pentium 4 with 1G RAM crawl. Oh, and what about all this casting up and down? Geez, I learned 10 years ago that a cast is often a sign of an error in design - with C# you need to cast all the time. Anyway, I think I am done with C# for a while, and I am thankful for that. A horrible experience.
My programming blahblahblah blog. If you ever find anything useful here, please let me know to remove it.
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: C# may be a good fit for web development (although web developers :laugh: I've heard that quite often. Somehow people confuse .NET with something related to the Internet, I'm sure the marketing folks are happy, but the developers may be a bit annoyed. But seriously, what makes you think that C# is web concentric? Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: but for complex desktop apps and libraries it is a disaster. Can you back up that claim with facts? Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: the stupid thing creates a new object on heap whenever a string needs to be changed (just don't mention the brain-damaged concept of StringBuilder) How often do you really need to change the actual contents of a string? And when you do, in what way do you find StringBuilder insufficient or even awkward to use? Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: Oh, and what about all this casting up and down? Geez, I learned 10 years ago that a cast is often a sign of an error in design - with C# you need to cast all the time. :omg::~ Uhm, you do?, why?... I don't make any more type casts in C# that I do in C++. If you find yourself casting a lot, then it's time to consider if you're missing something in your design. Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: and in no time all the memory is gone and GC starts in the middle of processing. Yep, this makes C# unsuited for apps that are time critical such as Medical Equipment and action games. Now, when we talk Medical Equipment, and other Mission Critical hardware products, you'll find that even C++ is rarely used here. As for action games, while it's a dream for most programmers I think, it's hard to find a lucky bastard who actually got such a job. I think we can safely say, that most applications are 'simple' desktop apps, and you'll have a hard time finding anyone, that are really annoyed by the GC using a second or two. "After all it's just text at the end of the day. - Colin Davies "For example, when a VB programmer comes to my house, they may say 'does your pool need cleaning, sir ?' " - Christian Graus
-
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: C# is a disaster: takes the worst part of C++ (syntax) without inheriting its main strengths: static type system, RAII, performance, flexibility. Actually, C# reminds me a lot more of Java than C++. Granted, Java can look a good bit like C++, but they both steal shamelessly from C (which i'll refer to here as "the second greatest language ever to exist", since we're basing all this on personal taste anyway) in the syntax department. Nemanja Trifunovic wrote: Geez, I learned 10 years ago that a cast is often a sign of an error in design Bah, that's C++ talk, that is. Any C programmer worth his salt knows: when in doubt, cast to void* and deal with it later... Design is for high-level concepts like algorithms and blame, not petty syntax details.
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...
Shog9 wrote: "the second greatest language ever to exist" This begs the question: What's the greatest language ever to exist? :) -- Oneigaishimasu! I blog too now[^]