|
It seems like there is a lot of sentiment that VB6 is pretty much useless to learn anymore. I'm not sure I agree with that position personally, but I wanted to throw it out there and see what sorts of responses we got. I particularly want to explore reasons other than the "maintain the vast body of legacy code out there" reason. A couple of things that occur to me personally are the ease of creating and using COM objects, and the ease of creating wrappers for the Win32 API. Are you still using Visual Basic? Tell us why it rocks (or not)...
|
|
|
|
|
Waste of time to teach n00bs VB6: push them straight to C# or Java. Have not come across a legacy VB6 application in at least 10 years. Other than as a historical oddity it would be pointless to get someone programming by starting with VB6.
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair.
nils illegitimus carborundum
me, me, me
|
|
|
|
|
I personally would push someone towards the new VB--VB.NET
However, when working with legacy apps, I could see the value of knowing VB6.
|
|
|
|
|
GeekForChrist wrote: However, when working with legacy apps, I could see the value of knowing VB6
Anyone who knows VB.NET is going to find their way around VB6 rather quickly.
I see no value in it whatsoever.
|
|
|
|
|
MehGerbil wrote: Anyone who knows VB.NET is going to find their way around VB6 rather quickly.
I know that, but I also know from my own experience that there's some things that I should know that are only VB6.
(I've been lost a few different times when reading VB6  )
|
|
|
|
|
mark merrens wrote: Waste of time to teach n00bs VB6: push them straight to C# or Java Lisp.
FTFY 
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
Learning a dead langauge (10 years out of maintenance) just for ease of COM use is ridiculous. VB6 had so many other real headaches that the COM bonus is wiped out by all the other FAIL. In short, you avoid a quickie COM headache but take on lung cancer - it's a bad trade.
Plus, every use I've seen for COM involves getting around limitations of VB6 that can be handled out of the box in VS2012 thanks to .NET and XAML.
|
|
|
|
|
I have to agree. Maybe I've been lucky so far, but doing COM in C# isn't really difficult. And for most common COM components* the work's already done for you, you just have to Google it.
*(I feel like that's a good start to a tongue twister...  )
|
|
|
|
|
Terrence Dorsey wrote: Are you still using Visual Basic? Tell us why it rocks (or not)...
Many investment banking jobs still pays top dollars for Desk Quants working their pricing models in Excel spreadsheets! (Although many such jobs are disappearing)
dev
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
