Vb 6.0
-
hello every one I am having one project to be developed in vb 6.0 and i am new to it. I want to use Menu strip item & toolstrip menuitem in it i known in .net it is drag and drop method but how is it done in VB 6.0.I made one MDI form in that i want to use these both. Please suggest. Thank You. :) :) :)
-
hello every one I am having one project to be developed in vb 6.0 and i am new to it. I want to use Menu strip item & toolstrip menuitem in it i known in .net it is drag and drop method but how is it done in VB 6.0.I made one MDI form in that i want to use these both. Please suggest. Thank You. :) :) :)
Tools > Menu Editor when you are on MDI form. For toolbar add reference to microsoft windows common controls. Good to still see VB6 programmers
-
hello every one I am having one project to be developed in vb 6.0 and i am new to it. I want to use Menu strip item & toolstrip menuitem in it i known in .net it is drag and drop method but how is it done in VB 6.0.I made one MDI form in that i want to use these both. Please suggest. Thank You. :) :) :)
-
Tools > Menu Editor when you are on MDI form. For toolbar add reference to microsoft windows common controls. Good to still see VB6 programmers
Enver Maroshi wrote:
Good to still see VB6 programmers
Why is it ? Because it's good to know that there are people worse off than you ? VB6 was always crap, and it's been unsupported for some time. VB.NET would be a lot less like VB6 if a bunch of MVPs had not revolted, MS knew they had made a mess, and were looking for a clean slate.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. "! i don't exactly like or do programming and it only gives me a headache." - spotted in VB forums. I can do things with my brain that I can't even google. I can flex the front part of my brain instantly anytime I want. It can be exhausting and it even causes me vision problems for some reason. - CaptainSeeSharp
-
Enver Maroshi wrote:
Good to still see VB6 programmers
Why is it ? Because it's good to know that there are people worse off than you ? VB6 was always crap, and it's been unsupported for some time. VB.NET would be a lot less like VB6 if a bunch of MVPs had not revolted, MS knew they had made a mess, and were looking for a clean slate.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. "! i don't exactly like or do programming and it only gives me a headache." - spotted in VB forums. I can do things with my brain that I can't even google. I can flex the front part of my brain instantly anytime I want. It can be exhausting and it even causes me vision problems for some reason. - CaptainSeeSharp
Not really, just brings up memories. I don't have it installed at home pc at all anymore, but no matter what, VB6 was and i could say still is most complete of them all. .Net for me is far away from complete. Speed? VB6 is much faster, it might have simpler GDI, etc.. but speed is much better than in .Net (for controls, not it's actual computing speed), it was simple and anyone could use it, was perfect for learning. Since Vb1 for dos i was using it, it did not give all those fancy stuff like most other languages in that time did have, but, sure was better than delphi (or pascal, depending on era). It's just that it was compact, and runtimes ware small. And it always did his job. Not only that, in VB6 a lot of times one would depend on APIs, now, with .Net, programers don't know what are APIs, they don't know there are windows dlls that give us some nice features, it's all managed now, so no one dares to subclass anymore. People underestimate VB (pre-.Net), it really was not that bad. And IDE? .Net is so slow, while VB6 did have really fast IDE. Sure, it's much nicer to programm in .Net, it's nice to write OO code, also saves me hours of work with all built in functions. But, also, it makes me more ignorant, before i would write algorithams, now, if i need encrypton, i will just use the one built in, while in VB6 i wrote 10 algortihams by specifications, it was so much more fun. Servers? I now have a class with all this, but before when i was making SMTP or IRC server, i did not read MSDN, i would read specifications of windows API. So much more fun, now, it's only coding with what we have already inside, thats good, saves us time, but the fun factor is gone.
-
Not really, just brings up memories. I don't have it installed at home pc at all anymore, but no matter what, VB6 was and i could say still is most complete of them all. .Net for me is far away from complete. Speed? VB6 is much faster, it might have simpler GDI, etc.. but speed is much better than in .Net (for controls, not it's actual computing speed), it was simple and anyone could use it, was perfect for learning. Since Vb1 for dos i was using it, it did not give all those fancy stuff like most other languages in that time did have, but, sure was better than delphi (or pascal, depending on era). It's just that it was compact, and runtimes ware small. And it always did his job. Not only that, in VB6 a lot of times one would depend on APIs, now, with .Net, programers don't know what are APIs, they don't know there are windows dlls that give us some nice features, it's all managed now, so no one dares to subclass anymore. People underestimate VB (pre-.Net), it really was not that bad. And IDE? .Net is so slow, while VB6 did have really fast IDE. Sure, it's much nicer to programm in .Net, it's nice to write OO code, also saves me hours of work with all built in functions. But, also, it makes me more ignorant, before i would write algorithams, now, if i need encrypton, i will just use the one built in, while in VB6 i wrote 10 algortihams by specifications, it was so much more fun. Servers? I now have a class with all this, but before when i was making SMTP or IRC server, i did not read MSDN, i would read specifications of windows API. So much more fun, now, it's only coding with what we have already inside, thats good, saves us time, but the fun factor is gone.
Enver Maroshi wrote:
VB6 was and i could say still is most complete of them all. .Net for me is far away from complete.
If I were you, I wouldn't be smoking that stuff any more. It is imparing your judgement.
Enver Maroshi wrote:
it makes me more ignorant, before i would write algorithams, now, if i need encrypton, i will just use the one built in
Seriously? You want to hand craft your own encryption algorithms? Personally, I have much better things to do with my time (and my company's time)
-
Enver Maroshi wrote:
VB6 was and i could say still is most complete of them all. .Net for me is far away from complete.
If I were you, I wouldn't be smoking that stuff any more. It is imparing your judgement.
Enver Maroshi wrote:
it makes me more ignorant, before i would write algorithams, now, if i need encrypton, i will just use the one built in
Seriously? You want to hand craft your own encryption algorithms? Personally, I have much better things to do with my time (and my company's time)
Colin Angus Mackay wrote:
If I were you, I wouldn't be smoking that stuff any more. It is imparing your judgement.
By complete what i did mean is, you never know which classes will change, which was a problem from moving a 1.1 to 2.0, since half of them became depricated. Was not necessery to do it, but sure its what they suggested. Oh, i will sue that cigarette company, i always knew they put some illegal substances in those cigarettes :-D
Colin Angus Mackay wrote:
I have much better things to do with my time (and my company's time)
Sure, everyone does, but you don't get to do cool stuff anymore, you are forced to use it, since it's alrady in there. There is no programming involved anymore, you just use the classes that are supplied with .Net framework. Where is fun in that? And you can not write your own, since boss will yell at you and tell you it would take to much time and would gain nothing.
-
Colin Angus Mackay wrote:
If I were you, I wouldn't be smoking that stuff any more. It is imparing your judgement.
By complete what i did mean is, you never know which classes will change, which was a problem from moving a 1.1 to 2.0, since half of them became depricated. Was not necessery to do it, but sure its what they suggested. Oh, i will sue that cigarette company, i always knew they put some illegal substances in those cigarettes :-D
Colin Angus Mackay wrote:
I have much better things to do with my time (and my company's time)
Sure, everyone does, but you don't get to do cool stuff anymore, you are forced to use it, since it's alrady in there. There is no programming involved anymore, you just use the classes that are supplied with .Net framework. Where is fun in that? And you can not write your own, since boss will yell at you and tell you it would take to much time and would gain nothing.
Enver Maroshi wrote:
By complete what i did mean is, you never know which classes will change
Well, you are right. VB 6 isn't going to change because Microsoft finally stopped supporting it last year.
Enver Maroshi wrote:
was a problem from moving a 1.1 to 2.0, since half of them became depricated
I would suggest that is hyperbole. A small number of classes were deprecated. Nowhere near half. And you can still use these classes, just be aware that they won't necessariliy be supported in future releases. (Just as VB 6 is no longer supported)
Enver Maroshi wrote:
Was not necessery to do it, but sure its what they suggested
I suspose they didn't have to tell us the classes were deprecated, but it should would be a shock to install a shiny new version of .NET to discover they weren't there any more.
Enver Maroshi wrote:
but you don't get to do cool stuff anymore, you are forced to use it, since it's alrady in there.
I have a lift in my apartment building, I also have stairs. I'm not forced to use the lift, I can always take the stairs. However, I use the lift becuase I'm several storeys up and it is easier to carry my shopping that way. Just because you have encryption classes doesn't mean you are forced to use them, although you'll find things much easier if you do.
Enver Maroshi wrote:
There is no programming involved anymore, you just use the classes that are supplied with .Net framework. Where is fun in that?
There is actually quite a lot of programming involved in a business application. Most of the fun is in delivering something that has value to the client.
Enver Maroshi wrote:
And you can not write your own, since boss will yell at you and tell you it would take to much time and would gain nothing.
Your boss is correct.
-
Enver Maroshi wrote:
By complete what i did mean is, you never know which classes will change
Well, you are right. VB 6 isn't going to change because Microsoft finally stopped supporting it last year.
Enver Maroshi wrote:
was a problem from moving a 1.1 to 2.0, since half of them became depricated
I would suggest that is hyperbole. A small number of classes were deprecated. Nowhere near half. And you can still use these classes, just be aware that they won't necessariliy be supported in future releases. (Just as VB 6 is no longer supported)
Enver Maroshi wrote:
Was not necessery to do it, but sure its what they suggested
I suspose they didn't have to tell us the classes were deprecated, but it should would be a shock to install a shiny new version of .NET to discover they weren't there any more.
Enver Maroshi wrote:
but you don't get to do cool stuff anymore, you are forced to use it, since it's alrady in there.
I have a lift in my apartment building, I also have stairs. I'm not forced to use the lift, I can always take the stairs. However, I use the lift becuase I'm several storeys up and it is easier to carry my shopping that way. Just because you have encryption classes doesn't mean you are forced to use them, although you'll find things much easier if you do.
Enver Maroshi wrote:
There is no programming involved anymore, you just use the classes that are supplied with .Net framework. Where is fun in that?
There is actually quite a lot of programming involved in a business application. Most of the fun is in delivering something that has value to the client.
Enver Maroshi wrote:
And you can not write your own, since boss will yell at you and tell you it would take to much time and would gain nothing.
Your boss is correct.
I give up :) But i can say for sure that writing code 10-15 years ago was much more fun than it is now. ;P So, you say that also no one should use c, assambler, etc... anymore?
-
I give up :) But i can say for sure that writing code 10-15 years ago was much more fun than it is now. ;P So, you say that also no one should use c, assambler, etc... anymore?
Enver Maroshi wrote:
So, you say that also no one should use c, assambler, etc... anymore?
VB6 is designed for writing business applications as is C# and VB.NET. If you are in that area then it is one of the good choices open to you. C and assembler are designed for writing operating systems, hardware drivers and embedded systems. If you are in that space then VB6 or VB.NET are not good choices. If you want to spend your time writing low level code then get a job doing that using C or assembler. If you want to write business applications then VB.NET, C# and Java are the kind of languages you should be looking at.
-
Enver Maroshi wrote:
So, you say that also no one should use c, assambler, etc... anymore?
VB6 is designed for writing business applications as is C# and VB.NET. If you are in that area then it is one of the good choices open to you. C and assembler are designed for writing operating systems, hardware drivers and embedded systems. If you are in that space then VB6 or VB.NET are not good choices. If you want to spend your time writing low level code then get a job doing that using C or assembler. If you want to write business applications then VB.NET, C# and Java are the kind of languages you should be looking at.
What i meant by referring to c and assembler is that they are also not supported, could nto be, it's just language, not a product, like VB6, but compilers for them which people use are in most cases 10 years old, and they still do the job. So, VB6, or basic language in its pre-OO age is still working and is funcitonal (well, maybe win7 does not support it). So, it is no more outdated than any other. But all of this are "complete", it's in stable state, and nothing changes. Now, in .Net we have something predefined which can change at any time, while in old VB6 you did have commands, and that is about it, something which did never change, just new ware added up over years. While .Net brings a lot of classes with each release of new framework version. I use .Net, and sure it's 10 times easier to write code in it, for a "real" project would not go to VB6, since its all much easier to be made in VB.Net. Why did i mention VB6 in first place? Well, back then VB programmers did have it's language, IDE and good support. VB.Net? It's got nothing to do with VB, really nothing, it was MS evil plan to make C++ and VB programmers think same way, and so we do, anyone who can work in VB.Net can work in C#, and vice versa. So, what happend is not that VB evolved, he is gone. Why did i say it's nice to see someone still using VB6? Well, if anyone wants to use, go for it, vb6 is not bad, never was, and it's last real basic :rolleyes: And those that did not work in VB6 might think that it sucked, but, my opinion is that it was maybe to simple for those that used C++ or something similiar. You could do all what one could do in C++, or C, except that it depended on runtime (but so did VC++). Oh, that is a long post. What i want to say is, if someone wants to use VB6, don't tell him not to. I'm sure he does know that VB6 runtimes will not come with never versions of windows. Btw, embeded systems? os? This is already possible using .Net (not all classes suported yet) :omg: