|
C# == VB.NET with slightly different syntax.
Some people may argue on the "slightly" part, but unless you still use VB6 libraries in your VB.NET code I think it would be more helpful to get a C# vs. VB.NET syntax comparison.
Something like this: VB.NET and C# Comparison[^]
Or this: Complete Comparison for VB.NET and C#[^]
Google is your friend.
I've switched from VB.NET to C# and only found myself really struggling with syntax on the first day and looking things up in the first month or so.
Any book on C# will probably spend one chapter on syntax and 10 chapters on stuff you already know like IO, Serialization, Collections, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: I've switched from VB.NET to C# and only found myself really struggling with syntax on the first day and looking things up in the first month or so.
In my case, then about once every 2 months getting really annoyed that you can't put an enum in an interface definition...
|
|
|
|
|
enum in an interface definition?
I'm not sure what you mean, but I guess I didn't know that was possible in either language
|
|
|
|
|
What continuously throws me off is the different default access modifiers.
|
|
|
|
|
Ouch yes - I have never successfully done "MustInherit" in C# without a Google brain refresh
|
|
|
|
|
It's virtual , no wait static , no wait abstract
I now have these kinds of problems when I have to switch back to VB
Public Shared Class ... wait
|
|
|
|
|
Isn't one of the first "best practices" suggestions to be explicit? I know I put all my access mods out. Helps when you do VB.NET and C# at the same time.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes it is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Having done the transition myself, I agree with Sander and would myself have posted his first link.
.
|
|
|
|
|
C# in Depth - C# in Depth: About this site, and C# in Depth[^]
Porting from VB.Net to C# isn't hard, but maybe you might want to find an easier book to help you on that road.
Once you begin to feel comfortable with C#, the C# in Depth book is a bible worth keeping.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks to everyone with their recommendations.
I did acquire a kindle version of Rob Miles' book in the end and have also ordered a copy of C# 6.0 and the .NET 4.6 Framework to be getting on with.
To ease me in, I have a number of small VB.net projects which I am going to rewrite in C# as I think this will be a good way to get familiar with the syntax.
Thanks again for you help - and happy holidays!
|
|
|
|
|
I found "The C# programming language" (by A.Hejlsberg - the lead architect of C#) very readable and useful because of short examples. 've been reading version 2.0, though ...
|
|
|
|
|
Proficiency in one means proficiency in other (assuming you didn't "learn" VB.NET by assuming it is same as VB).
If you really learned OOP with .NET, it is irrelevant which of the two you use. I prefer VB.NET, but can (and do) work in C# with occasional google reminder of proper syntax.
|
|
|
|
|
|
We are in 2016... 1900 is 116 years ago meaning that you are 128 years old if you start programming at 12.
Philippe Mori
|
|
|
|
|
Haha! "1900 and frozen to death" is an expression meaning so far back in time than I care to remember!
|
|
|
|
|
|
1) The main drawback to designing your system around eventual consistency is
|
|
|
|
|
2) I must learn to finish what I star
Slogans aren't solutions.
|
|
|
|
|
If I had a nickel for every
New version: WinHeist Version 2.2.2 Beta I told my psychiatrist that I was hearing voices in my head. He said you don't have a psychiatrist!
|
|
|
|
|
that when it comes to end users, the only consistency you can expect is that there will never be any consistency in how it's used.
if (Object.DividedByZero == true) { Universe.Implode(); }
Meus ratio ex fortis machina. Simplicitatis de formae ac munus. -Foothill, 2016
|
|
|
|
|
EDIT: Better one.
3) Awesome, so everyone's up to par on the xxxJS libr- oh, there's a new new one now?
modified 23-Dec-16 13:35pm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
No factorials. I am disappointed.
Happy holidays to you as well
|
|
|
|