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
CODE PROJECT For Those Who Code
  • Home
  • Articles
  • FAQ
Community
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. One Place I will prefer VB.NET over C#

One Place I will prefer VB.NET over C#

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
csharpc++com
14 Posts 11 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.
  • R Rama Krishna Vavilala

    ... Writing Office Addins. Call it C# language problems (who thought the idea not to support optional parameters) or Office COM issues - functions with tons of optional parameters). Either way the reality is that developing Office Addins suck in C#. Compare: C#

    Application.Workbooks.Open(fileName, Missing.Value, true, Missing.Value,
    Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value,
    Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value,
    Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value);

    with VB.NET

    Applications.Workbooks.Open(fileName,,true);

    or even C++ is better

    m_spApplication->Workbooks->Open(pszFileName, vtMissing, true);

    D Offline
    D Offline
    David Stone
    wrote on last edited by
    #2

    The ability to use named parameters would be even better...

    W 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • D David Stone

      The ability to use named parameters would be even better...

      W Offline
      W Offline
      wout de zeeuw
      wrote on last edited by
      #3

      Ooooh, I'm drooling at the thought! Funny they did that for Attribute constructors though.

      Wout

      E 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • R Rama Krishna Vavilala

        ... Writing Office Addins. Call it C# language problems (who thought the idea not to support optional parameters) or Office COM issues - functions with tons of optional parameters). Either way the reality is that developing Office Addins suck in C#. Compare: C#

        Application.Workbooks.Open(fileName, Missing.Value, true, Missing.Value,
        Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value,
        Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value,
        Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value);

        with VB.NET

        Applications.Workbooks.Open(fileName,,true);

        or even C++ is better

        m_spApplication->Workbooks->Open(pszFileName, vtMissing, true);

        C Offline
        C Offline
        Christian Graus
        wrote on last edited by
        #4

        Yeah, it's beyond me why we still don't have optional parameters in C#. I also like how events are defined with the 'handles' keyword in VB.NET. I'd give both of those up for unsafe blocks and sane syntax tho.

        Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ "I am working on a project that will convert a FORTRAN code to corresponding C++ code.I am not aware of FORTRAN syntax" ( spotted in the C++/CLI forum )

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • W wout de zeeuw

          Ooooh, I'm drooling at the thought! Funny they did that for Attribute constructors though.

          Wout

          E Offline
          E Offline
          Ed Poore
          wrote on last edited by
          #5

          wout de zeeuw wrote:

          Funny they did that for Attribute constructors though.

          It's on the way though :cool:

          My Blog

          D 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • E Ed Poore

            wout de zeeuw wrote:

            Funny they did that for Attribute constructors though.

            It's on the way though :cool:

            My Blog

            D Offline
            D Offline
            David Stone
            wrote on last edited by
            #6

            Named Parameters for function calls? No. They're not. Not in C# 3.0 anyway.

            R E 2 Replies Last reply
            0
            • D David Stone

              Named Parameters for function calls? No. They're not. Not in C# 3.0 anyway.

              R Offline
              R Offline
              Rocky Moore
              wrote on last edited by
              #7

              Yeah, so far as I can see only on object creation, but hey, they are in the front door, I would not imagine it will be much longer before they arrive! That is one thing I really love about C#, it continues to evolve by the needs of the community. Just glad MS listens!

              Rocky <>< Latest Code Blog Post: Interesting description of MS Acropolis.. Latest Tech Blog Post: Microsoft Surface!

              P D 2 Replies Last reply
              0
              • R Rocky Moore

                Yeah, so far as I can see only on object creation, but hey, they are in the front door, I would not imagine it will be much longer before they arrive! That is one thing I really love about C#, it continues to evolve by the needs of the community. Just glad MS listens!

                Rocky <>< Latest Code Blog Post: Interesting description of MS Acropolis.. Latest Tech Blog Post: Microsoft Surface!

                P Offline
                P Offline
                PIEBALDconsult
                wrote on last edited by
                #8

                Rocky Moore wrote:

                Just glad MS listens!

                And there's no international bureaucracy to mess it up.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • R Rama Krishna Vavilala

                  ... Writing Office Addins. Call it C# language problems (who thought the idea not to support optional parameters) or Office COM issues - functions with tons of optional parameters). Either way the reality is that developing Office Addins suck in C#. Compare: C#

                  Application.Workbooks.Open(fileName, Missing.Value, true, Missing.Value,
                  Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value,
                  Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value,
                  Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value);

                  with VB.NET

                  Applications.Workbooks.Open(fileName,,true);

                  or even C++ is better

                  m_spApplication->Workbooks->Open(pszFileName, vtMissing, true);

                  P Offline
                  P Offline
                  PIEBALDconsult
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #9

                  Well, you can wrap it in something better, right? Hide the details.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • R Rocky Moore

                    Yeah, so far as I can see only on object creation, but hey, they are in the front door, I would not imagine it will be much longer before they arrive! That is one thing I really love about C#, it continues to evolve by the needs of the community. Just glad MS listens!

                    Rocky <>< Latest Code Blog Post: Interesting description of MS Acropolis.. Latest Tech Blog Post: Microsoft Surface!

                    D Offline
                    D Offline
                    DJ van Wyk
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #10

                    Rocky Moore wrote:

                    Just glad MS listens!

                    And for me it's just sad that Borland only listens a couple years later.

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • R Rama Krishna Vavilala

                      ... Writing Office Addins. Call it C# language problems (who thought the idea not to support optional parameters) or Office COM issues - functions with tons of optional parameters). Either way the reality is that developing Office Addins suck in C#. Compare: C#

                      Application.Workbooks.Open(fileName, Missing.Value, true, Missing.Value,
                      Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value,
                      Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value,
                      Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value);

                      with VB.NET

                      Applications.Workbooks.Open(fileName,,true);

                      or even C++ is better

                      m_spApplication->Workbooks->Open(pszFileName, vtMissing, true);

                      N Offline
                      N Offline
                      NormDroid
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #11

                      X| Think I be sticking c#.

                      .net is a box of never ending treasures, every day I get find another gem.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • R Rama Krishna Vavilala

                        ... Writing Office Addins. Call it C# language problems (who thought the idea not to support optional parameters) or Office COM issues - functions with tons of optional parameters). Either way the reality is that developing Office Addins suck in C#. Compare: C#

                        Application.Workbooks.Open(fileName, Missing.Value, true, Missing.Value,
                        Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value,
                        Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value,
                        Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value);

                        with VB.NET

                        Applications.Workbooks.Open(fileName,,true);

                        or even C++ is better

                        m_spApplication->Workbooks->Open(pszFileName, vtMissing, true);

                        A Offline
                        A Offline
                        Anish M
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #12

                        This is one place I might still like to use VB.NET, calling COM APIs. But can you call it a C# language problems?

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • D David Stone

                          Named Parameters for function calls? No. They're not. Not in C# 3.0 anyway.

                          E Offline
                          E Offline
                          Ed Poore
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #13

                          My mistake I was thinking about constructors.

                          My Blog

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • R Rama Krishna Vavilala

                            ... Writing Office Addins. Call it C# language problems (who thought the idea not to support optional parameters) or Office COM issues - functions with tons of optional parameters). Either way the reality is that developing Office Addins suck in C#. Compare: C#

                            Application.Workbooks.Open(fileName, Missing.Value, true, Missing.Value,
                            Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value,
                            Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value,
                            Missing.Value, Missing.Value, Missing.Value);

                            with VB.NET

                            Applications.Workbooks.Open(fileName,,true);

                            or even C++ is better

                            m_spApplication->Workbooks->Open(pszFileName, vtMissing, true);

                            E Offline
                            E Offline
                            ednrgc
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #14

                            In an announcer voice : "Visual Basic scores!!! VB is edging back into this game!!! We'll take a break with the current score C#:976, VB: 1"

                            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