|
Some observations about our codebase:
- we still write new VB6 code where it is part of a larger project envir.
- we can drop some amount due to functionality not more in use
- so the total VB6 amount stays about the same.
- in rare situations only, legacy gets replaced by "actual paradigm work"
customer forces us to do so)
- quality of legacy code is abt same or slightly better than actual/new code
even if estimate mine & my coworkers proficiency better than 10 yrs ago.
we measure our efficiency/quality in lines to replace per 1000 lines total, where the customer does not have to pay for.
|
|
|
|
|
That is typical of any codebase.
But who can justify re-writing an entire codebase just because Microsoft decides that they want to replace one language with another to increase their profits.
It is time for Microsoft to either update or open source the VB6 programming language.
Update or open source the VB6 programming language
|
|
|
|
|
As such, its statistical importance is, like, way off the bottom of the chart.
That, and bananas are only red once they jump over the moon backwards on Tuesdays while it rains the color 9 as you listen to a green octagon being played by the letter J, who just had a birthday, by the way.
modified 12-Aug-14 12:05pm.
|
|
|
|
|
For an accepted error rate of 3%, you need the answer of some 1110 people with a "population" of 10,000,000.
See any decent documentation on "representative sample". E.g. How Many People Do I Need to Take My Survey?[^].
So, we are pretty good here, probably 2% error or less (I had to lookup the exact formula, though).
Cheers
Andi
|
|
|
|
|
Why stop there at 10,000,000? There are billions of people on the planet by your argument. When did statistics become unreliable because they did not cover everyone?
Regards,
Rob Philpott.
|
|
|
|
|
SURVEY SEYZ ~ Take an Anal-Rententive Suppression Pill
Freakin' criminey, man! SORRY for not including an emoticon EXPLICITLY INFERRING the post was non-serious.
Not that the post's info was of significance to the overall subject matter as something to *seriously* consider and contemplate upon in the first place nor that the info on bananas are only red once they jump over the moon backwards on Tuesdays... was entirely accurate.
|
|
|
|
|
Terribly sorry old boy, I think the humour slipped past me. I like numbers. 
Regards,
Rob Philpott.
|
|
|
|
|
Oh, OK. Here are some random ones for you, then:
6846 19 5 327 406431 38491 91037 34 19 31 67 1 91 3 94384 84 0
If none of those do, try a slice of this one: 3.14159
Oh, yea, here's that emoticonversatoinalisticallyism thingy
|
|
|
|
|
Almost perfect curve, well at the moment anyway.
Regards,
Rob Philpott.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't have enough time to think what the right answer is...
--
The trouble with people,
is that they want to hear only what they want to hear.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The surface area represents the increasing functionality of the application.
The volume represents the increasing codebase to maintain.
(use this metaphor to explain to PHBs)
|
|
|
|
|
But it works the other way around, Shirley?
PooperPig - Coming Soon
|
|
|
|
|
Duncan Edwards Jones wrote: to PHBs
They just want you to "push the envelope".
You'll never get very far if all you do is follow instructions.
|
|
|
|
|
Sometimes they like to float some paradigms outside of the box to see who salutes.
|
|
|
|
|
We're slowly, but surely replacing our Legacy code with new versions that will no doubt in the fullness of time become the new Legacy code.
Psychosis at 10
Film at 11
Those who do not remember the past, are doomed to repeat it.
Those who do not remember the past, cannot build upon it.
|
|
|
|
|
Those that don't keep past source code can not rebuild it.
|
|
|
|
|
DannyVarod wrote: Those that don't keep past source code can not rebuild it.
True, so true. I keep everything, except from one place where the code was caca and my attempts to clean it up just encouraged them to continue using it.
However (sniff) I just had to pitch several cases of source listings I either wrote or annotated from my days of Apple II 6502 Assembly programming that were water damaged. 
Psychosis at 10
Film at 11
Those who do not remember the past, are doomed to repeat it.
Those who do not remember the past, cannot build upon it.
|
|
|
|
|
Software people have changed the meaning of "legacy" - for the worse IMHO. Legacy used to mean something impressive, prominent and well respected. In software circles, it doesn't mean any of these things.
This[^] says it all.
I'm retired. There's a nap for that...
- Harvey
|
|
|
|
|
|
"anything handed down from the past, as from an ancestor or predecessor: the legacy of ancient Rome. "
A legacy can be legendary, but that's not a requirement for a legacy.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
I completely agree with you! I have made beaucoup money working on legacy code.
Nothing is my fault, I always have an excuse (these days, the original developers are DEAD), and their only choice is to re-write a perfectly functioning system, even if clunky.
Charlie Gilley
<italic>Stuck in a dysfunctional matrix from which I must escape...
"Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
|
|
|
|
|
There are (according to Gartner research) 14 billion lines of VB6 programming still in use.
Who is going to rewrite that ?
The reality is that much legacy code will remain. If and when we get to the position that the software will not run (presumably on some future version of Windows, or when there is no longer a Windows desktop) then the users won't upgrade from their existing version of Windows.
With Visual Basic 6, most legacy programming is likely to remain in use on Windows or on VMs or on an emulator (WINE or whatever else becomes available).
Update or open source the VB6 programming language
|
|
|
|
|
It will fade away eventually.
I have a 30yr old piece of software I am replacing because it only runs on XP now (still DOS based).
But I noticed 2-3 other pieces of VB6 code that are no longer needed, specifically BECAUSE they are
moving away from that platform...
So, I will vote that some will be killed off, and much of it will die for a lack of need.
The great thing about good code, is that it should not have to change. Although, when
that really happens, people move to new, living software 
|
|
|
|
|
That is just the way it should be.
It shouldn't be that Microsoft 'decides' everyone should re-write their software in a new Microsoft language every few years.
Now is the time for Microsoft to either update or open source the VB6 programming language ? Why won't they ? Perhaps they realize that updated VB6 programming would be more popular than their newer languages.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
