|
Used properly it allows you to code try catch blocks
:
:
:
on error resume next
perform_some_action_which_may_generate_an_error
on error goto 0
test_and_act_upon_err_object
:
:
:
unfortunately most people forget to do the testing part.
|
|
|
|
|
Not sure what that does, but it's possible in C# as well
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: VB can only do everything C# can
No it can't; there are things C# can do that VB.net can't.
|
|
|
|
|
Like? Use unsafe code... If I wanted unsafe I wouldn't go with C# either!
And there's some stuff VB can do that C# can't too
|
|
|
|
|
Case sensivity...
It's just a horrible mess in VB..
public class Demo {
public string Name { get; set; }
public Demo (string name) {
Name = name;
}
}
Public Class Demo
Public Property Name As String
Public Sub New(name As String)
Name = name
End Sub
End Class
Guess what? C# assigns the property in the constructor, whereas VB.Net doesn't...
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: f you just love those curly braces and semi-colons... A simple } looks lot better that bloody End IF , End For , End Select , and End Using all over the bloody place.
No object is so beautiful that, under certain conditions, it will not look ugly. - Oscar Wilde
|
|
|
|
|
But at least you know what you're ending!
And really, is all that hatred towards VB because of some End If instead of }?
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: But at least you know what you're ending I should only need to know that I'm ending a code block.And really, is all that hatred towards VB because of some End If instead of }? It's so much more than that.
No object is so beautiful that, under certain conditions, it will not look ugly. - Oscar Wilde
|
|
|
|
|
Except when your code blocks are catchs in ifs in switchs.
|
|
|
|
|
If you're doing that, you need more help than just a VB.NET End can give.
No object is so beautiful that, under certain conditions, it will not look ugly. - Oscar Wilde
|
|
|
|
|
While doing linq in VB.NET is possible it is implemented much better in C#.
Eric
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've used LINQ in both C# and VB.net... a lot. Once again, there is no real difference between the two languages. C# has better syntax; it makes you look smarter. VB.net gives you a better idea of what's actually happening; it educates you.
.NET is the magic here. C# and VB.net are just twin languages riding its glory.
- great coders make code look easy
- When humans are doing things computers could be doing instead, the computers get together late at night and laugh at us. - ¿Neal Ford?
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: There is no finer language on earth in Mordor!
FTFY!
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Ash VB durbatulûk, ash VB gimbatul,
ash VB thrakatulûk, agh burzum-ishi krimpatul.
|
|
|
|
|
Pete O'Hanlon wrote: Pragmatic.
Ahem...
if (OriginalPoster == isProgrammerWhoDoesMaintenanceOnOwnCode)
{
OriginalPoster = PragmaticProgrammer;
}
else
{
OriginalPoster = MajorProblemCreator;
}
|
|
|
|
|
Step away from the keyboard, and take a long walk. Rest your mind and your senses. Don't take this stuff we do, too seriously.
|
|
|
|
|
IMHO, a good rule is:
1. Make it work.
2. Then make it work better - run faster, use lesser memory, use better algorithms, etc.; essentially optimize.
Have seen people creating elaborate UML diagrams, only to find shortcomings in the code. In one extreme case, the code (C++) did not run; then the coder globally replaced all private by public , and it ran; throwing away all encapsulation to the wind; fixing this was a nightmare
|
|
|
|
|
Wat be this private thing you speak of?
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
|
The first law of optimization: Don't do it
The second law of optimization: If you HAVE to do it, don't do it yet!
The only real optimization you can do is to replace your algorithm or data structures (or both). That means you go back to square one (not necessarily for the entire system, but for that part you try to optimize), and the two laws above still applies.
|
|
|
|
|
codejet wrote: I just realised that I am one of those people who can write code that works
pretty well. Gratz; it's harder than it appears.
codejet wrote: Question is who/what am I? A pretty good programmer/developer. Must be, based on your second sentence.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Ok, I am going to request that my job title be changed from Applications Developer to Pragmatic Application Developer and will be sure to mention that I am pragmatic in my next interview.
|
|
|
|
|
Depressed? Relax and On Error Resume Next...get it working, then make it work right! In software there's always room for improvement!
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: Relax and On Error Resume Next
That needs to be on a t-shirt!!!
- great coders make code look easy
- When humans are doing things computers could be doing instead, the computers get together late at night and laugh at us. - ¿Neal Ford?
|
|
|
|