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
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. C# 4.0: VB revisited

C# 4.0: VB revisited

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
csharpcomtoolsquestion
25 Posts 14 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.
  • B Bassam Abdul Baki

    Shog9 wrote:

    Naw, they're all still using VBScript.

    VBScript is to C++ what VBA is to VB6. :)

    Web - Blog - RSS - Math - BM

    S Offline
    S Offline
    Scott Barbour
    wrote on last edited by
    #21

    I don't think that analogy works... The biggest difference between VBA and VB6 is the ability to compile standalone programs. I've used VBA in instances where I didn't have VB6 at my disposal. The vast majority of functionality is identical (VB6 even uses the VBA libraries) VBScript and C++ are completely different creatures entirely.

    I don't claim to be a know it all, for I know that I am not...

    I usually have an answer though.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • S Shog9 0

      http://www.infoq.com/news/2008/10/CSharp-Optional[^] Named parameters. Optional parameters. Dynamic (late-bound) types. About time. Maybe now we can let VB.NET fade into obscurity and bring everyone on board VB With Braces.

      ----

      You're right. These facts that you've laid out totally contradict the wild ramblings that I pulled off the back of cornflakes packets.

      L Offline
      L Offline
      leppie
      wrote on last edited by
      #22

      Soon I will be able to go over to Scheme entirely, it seems this is encouraged by MS :)

      xacc.ide - now with TabsToSpaces support
      IronScheme - 1.0 beta 1 - out now!
      ((lambda (x) `((lambda (x) ,x) ',x)) '`((lambda (x) ,x) ',x))

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • M martin_hughes

        I'm all Iron now, with added Iron and a sprinkling of Iron on top. Very much looking forward to IronC#, but I've a feeling the whole static/dynamic argument is cyclical and that VB6 will be the cure all :omg: :wtf:

        My Bookmarks I clicked the link. In an instant I was transported 15 years back in time.

        P Offline
        P Offline
        Pete OHanlon
        wrote on last edited by
        #23

        I'm at IronButt version 1.2.

        Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.

        My blog | My articles | MoXAML PowerToys

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • S Shog9 0

          http://www.infoq.com/news/2008/10/CSharp-Optional[^] Named parameters. Optional parameters. Dynamic (late-bound) types. About time. Maybe now we can let VB.NET fade into obscurity and bring everyone on board VB With Braces.

          ----

          You're right. These facts that you've laid out totally contradict the wild ramblings that I pulled off the back of cornflakes packets.

          realJSOPR Offline
          realJSOPR Offline
          realJSOP
          wrote on last edited by
          #24

          Default parameters would be a welcomed addition. I liked using them in C++, but they complicated the use of function overloading - you essentially had to choose between function overloading, or using default parameters.

          "Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
          -----
          "...the staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - Jason Jystad, 10/26/2001

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • P peterchen

            But who will we mock then?

            Burning Chrome ^ | Linkify!| FoldWithUs! | sighist

            N Offline
            N Offline
            Nish Nishant
            wrote on last edited by
            #25

            peterchen wrote:

            But who will we mock then?

            Ourselves :-)

            Regards, Nish


            Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
            My latest book : C++/CLI in Action / Amazon.com link

            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