|
I jumped ship to Delphi when it was first released, stayed with it for seven years then jumpt to C#. Haven't looked back since. 
Andy
|
|
|
|
|
Jump from MFC to .net/c# glad to see the back of MFC after spending so many years with it.
.net is a box of never ending treasures, every day I get find another gem.
|
|
|
|
|
It's not the language it's the ability of a non computer proficient user to able able to learn VB then consider themselves programmers, hence badly designed code and user interfaces. I've seen this happen in many project during the '90s. I also found VB too restrictive and the syntax somewhat clumsy, but hey thats my opinion. c# seems to address the needs where C++ required heavy costumisation of the UI, with MFC and other frameworks it was a slow and labourious process to constuct a rich UI. C++ is great for backend and critical processing of data.
.net is a box of never ending treasures, every day I get find another gem.
|
|
|
|
|
Agreed, As a programmer that works in a hospital I have seen my share of poorly constructed VB programs. It looks like some companies farm their entire project out to a single 10 year old programmer and then go on to sell their product at $2500 a seat while management laughs all the way to the bank.
John
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah that's coincidental, I've seen Hospitals, Airports, Manufacturing all failed attempts at recreating complex business management systems. It seems the choice of choosing VB was the labour costs are alot cheaper than professional programmers/software engineers.
.net is a box of never ending treasures, every day I get find another gem.
|
|
|
|
|
There are not bad languages, there are bad programmers, whatever language they use.
|
|
|
|
|
I have to agree! I have seen some POORLY written C# applications as well as horrific Classic ASP pages. Poor programmers can get their bad practices and even worse code applied to just about ANY programming/scripting language!
JamminJimE
Microsoft Certified Application Developer
|
|
|
|
|
We made the error in 1997 of believing vb was the tool to make our project, ms did whatever was necessary to make us belive in VB, and so we did it, ive spent last 3 years porting and normalizing code to move out to c++, probably next year it will be all finished, im talking about around a million lines of code, lots and lots of functionality, but this time, im not using any .net monstrosity.
|
|
|
|
|
Jan Rodriguez wrote: made the error in 1997 of believing vb
Jan Rodriguez wrote: but this time, im not using any .net monstrosity
So back in 1997 you were using .net? or I am reading this wrong?
.net is a box of never ending treasures, every day I get find another gem.
|
|
|
|
|
Nah, I think he meant that he was using vb back in 1997. .NET wasn't around at that time 
WM.
What about weapons of mass-construction?
"What? Its an Apple MacBook Pro. They are sexy!" - Paul Watson
|
|
|
|
|
I think you are reading wrong. He says they did a huge project using VB that they started in 1997. in 2004 they find out that if they want to survive they have to move, because MS decided to kill theirs support to VB. Off course after that bad experience no one want to go back with MS and follow them in their new trend. That is why he says: "but this time, im not using any .net monstrosity"
|
|
|
|
|
He wrote that they used then VB. And his conclusion is NOT using .net.
Greetings from Germany
|
|
|
|
|
Ofcourse you read it wrong 
Probably he mean, he chose VB6 in 1997...
As the other threads states, C++ is useful for Critical Implementations, Ever growing functionalities & code, Ever Maintained Projects which goes beyond Programming Languages... something thats was started at 90s now getting converted to VB.NET/C#.NET apps (this excludes few time updated personal software like budget planning, birthday tracking etc.,).
VB in any form is somewhat uncomfortable (but not completely) to write million lines of code or 1000s of functionalities...
|
|
|
|
|
Were doing our GUI-Software mostly via C++ with MFC-use and we have tried one C#-Solution and it makes a lot of additional working and testing.
But nobody wont to blame C#, I am uppset about this dishonisty. 
I think MS will drop MFC/C++ Development to push people to .net, so in future we will have to make a decision whether using C# or another class library as QT (Trolltech).
Greetings from Germany
|
|
|
|
|
I dont think ms will remove suport for unmanaged c++ compiling, i dunno about MFC, i saw their last move trying to mix ATL and MFC in a desperate attempt to save MFC, even if it meant breaking a bit of ATL.
|
|
|
|
|
KarstenK wrote: I think MS will drop MFC/C++ Development to push people to .net, so in future we will have to make a decision whether using C# or another class library as QT (Trolltech).
hopefully we'll be able to use QT and boost libraries or something alike and c++ will always be 
|
|
|
|
|
I think sticking to C/C++ will be worth it, because you can successfully target other platforms like Linux and MacOs.
But most of all: I love programming C++ 
Greetings from Germany
|
|
|
|
|
We have a few applications that haven't been given the okay to upgrade, port over, or just abandon all together. I actually spend quite a bit of time tweaking these applications to meet new demands from our users.
Personnally I would be happy to just be done with it all together;), even though I'm thankful for all the experience that I've gotten from working with the applications.
An American football fan -
Go Seahawks!
Lil Turtle
|
|
|
|
|
That's our case too. Wishing for those apps to die, but it just seems like they never will...
Enhance the trance
|
|
|
|
|
We (ok, at my _previous_ work, i dont technically have one now) had a VB.Net application that was no longer being developed, just maintained. All new things done in C#.
|
|
|
|
|
We are using VBA to plug our client-side C++ code into MS Word, but I guess it is not "real" VB.
|
|
|
|
|
Its the only VB I deal with, we have a couple little Access Forms applications, which are of course in VBA.
|
|
|
|
|
VB has left the building where I work about two years ago. Personally I didn't dislike VB.NET, it's just that C# has some more tricks and is more common here
WM.
What about weapons of mass-construction?
"What? Its an Apple MacBook Pro. They are sexy!" - Paul Watson
|
|
|
|
|
The royal We, in this case. WE touched some VB6 stuff ages ago, and was sufficiently touched by it that WE will never program in it again unless WE are starving.
Thyme In The CountryInteracxPeople are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
People who say that they will refactor their code later to make it "good" don't understand refactoring, nor the art and craft of programming. -- Josh Smith
|
|
|
|
|
VB6 was a good choice for many. I programmed DOS with C, but for Windows it was far easier to use VB6 than C (I'm not a masochist, you see...). Now, with .NET Framework, C# is my only choice.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
![Badger | [badger,badger,badger,badger...]](https://codeproject.freetls.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/badger.gif)
