New Boss Equals Many Changes
-
db7uk wrote:
An interesting move from your director if I may say so. What was his motive behind the switch?
Well, apparently his team found "something" that they weren't able to do in VB.NET, so they tried it in C# and got it to work...therefore logic dictates that C# trumps VB.NET as an overall solution to all problems (I heartedly disagree with this thought, but hey I've yet to see anything that can be done in C# that can't be done in VB.NET, but there could be those cases).
db7uk wrote:
If someone were to ask me to change the code language they had better come up with a reasonable reason why! or am I missing something?
First off, Directors don't need reasons, they are the reason, but I know this guy and he's been with our bigger organization for well over 25 years, so he must have good reason. But, the discussion isn't finished by any means. Good thing about being a manager and coder is that I can basically provide the up/down side to doing this, provide good examples and suggestions (from all you kind folks) as to why we should attempt conversion and then see what happens. At the end of the day, regardless of the decision, we'll do what we're tasked to do, amke it work for our end users and drink a cold beer after...it's what we do best (not just the beer part).
modified on Friday, June 25, 2010 10:57 AM
Zhat wrote:
I've yet to see anything that can be done in C# that can't be done in VB.NET, but there could be those cases
Yield, doesn't have an equivalent in vb.net. And I may add that it was a major pain to convert a small piece of code from C# to vb.net retaining identical functionality.
"When did ignorance become a point of view" - Dilbert
-
Zhat wrote:
I've yet to see anything that can be done in C# that can't be done in VB.NET, but there could be those cases
Yield, doesn't have an equivalent in vb.net. And I may add that it was a major pain to convert a small piece of code from C# to vb.net retaining identical functionality.
"When did ignorance become a point of view" - Dilbert
Well, now I know and agree. There's always something, but the point is to convert ALL existing code for those rare occasions. It seems alot easier to just leave them alone, Code in C# moving forward and if there's ever a problem, we can always code in VB.NET..the framework cares less...but we'll see what he says. :)
-
Well, now I know and agree. There's always something, but the point is to convert ALL existing code for those rare occasions. It seems alot easier to just leave them alone, Code in C# moving forward and if there's ever a problem, we can always code in VB.NET..the framework cares less...but we'll see what he says. :)
I'm pretty sure I can find a few examples of where vb can't be converted to C# too, but I just didn't have any examples in mind. My point was: If it works, don't touch it.
"When did ignorance become a point of view" - Dilbert