|
IMHO, VB is the easiest-to-learn visual programming environment. If only I had known about it before learning about the Message Map macros in MFC, I would have learnt things faster.
|
|
|
|
|
Amarnath S wrote: I would have learnt things faster.
Probably, but, would you have learned the correct ones?
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Amarnath S wrote: the Message Map macros in MFC
I wasted far too much of my life grappling with those abominations. 
|
|
|
|
|
Caroline says she wants a language but it's just a toy.
"In testa che avete, Signor di Ceprano?"
-- Rigoletto
|
|
|
|
|
In .NET it makes no sense, there is only the CLR and C# is the sensible choice - many languages have C-like syntax, only VB has VB-like syntax.
If they will ever make a native VB7 personally I will be if not the first adopter, the second. It's happening more and more that I need to put up a small interface for testing or an intelligent script with some graphic and swear against the useless complications imposed by the alternatives. I miss VB (but not On Error Resiume Next).
GCS/GE d--(d) s-/+ a C+++ U+++ P-- L+@ E-- W+++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- r+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
The shortest horror story: On Error Resume Next
|
|
|
|
|
den2k88 wrote: In .NET it makes no sense, there is only the CLR and C# is the sensible choice
There is only one language in .NET - MSIL. Whether C#, F#, VB, or any of a number of other "syntactic sugar" .NET languages made by MS or third parties, the language processor is responsible for converting the language code to MSIL. If MS decides not to update the VB engine to convert to newer MSIL constructs, that is their choice. I use C# 99.99% of the time, so I have not used VB in a long time (outside occasional maintenance or conversion to C#). If there is not enough of a market to support extending VB when they extend C#, then it makes sense to start sunsetting it. Personally, I prefer the VB syntax over the archaic and unnecessary curly bracket and semicolon throwbacks to the last century, but they are second nature after 20 years.
Besides, you can reference .NET libraries (whatever language they are written in) in VB (since they are compiled to MSIL), so the capabilities, if not the exact syntax, are available in VB if you want it.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm on the verge of retiring and haven't built a new commercial system for ages; when I last did, I used C#, and a couple of hobby websites I'm using C#. But I'm also still supporting VB.Net stuff (including one large commercial system) and have even found a couple of 3rd parties who are happy to take over long-term support for it.
If I need to knock up a proof-of-concept or a quick web utility for myself, I still find VB quicker than C#. And in work, I've yet to find anything I can't do in VB.Net that I can (and want to) do in C#.
But I'm a bit of a Luddite anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not enough "samples". If you have to start somewhere (with MS), finding "working samples" (C#) is a big plus.
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
|
|
|
|
|
I treated Basic with contempt in early days. Baffled by why people used VB6 when Delphi was so much more regular and productive. However, when I first saw VB, I was impressed - at last BASIC as a real programming language, However, there was also the wonderful C# that, to me, "looked like Java and smelled like Delphi".
|
|
|
|
|
Visual Basic is not dead.
It just smells funny.
Like Jazz.
However I do think that it is doomed in the end.
"Rock journalism is people who can't write interviewing people who can't talk for people who can't read." Frank Zappa 1980
|
|
|
|
|
imo VB6 died. And VBA , VB.NET are dying.
And I am sad about it. The programming languages I have used most are VB6 and VBA. Even now, I use mainly VB6 and some VB.NET. I have NOT touched python and even C#
Now, its for VB6 and VBA users to resurrect VB6 and keep VBA alive. Microsoft abandoned VB6 and will soon abandon VB.NET and even VBA. So those who like VB6, VBA etc will have to work to keep it alive
|
|
|
|
|
Started quite a few new project using vb.net. It is a cool, chilled language, more modern than the workhorse, Delphi 7.
Used C# a lot before. As others pointed out, it is a C (as in cancer) type language driven into total chaos by the Cool Kids On The Codeblock. Release by release harder to follow the syntax incorporating things from All The Cool Languages. Including from Dartmouth BASIC 
|
|
|
|
|
Been using one flavor or
another of Basic for most of my 30+ year career including VB6 and VB.Net but I’ve not touched it since 2021. I didn’t think I would like C# at first but now I can’t really imagine ever going back to VB. But I don’t think VB will ever completely die.
|
|
|
|
|
First, What is Visual Basic?
We have VB (classic), VB-Script and VB (.Net)
The first one (VB Classic)is dead - the last version was released in 1999.
But it's coming back to live; google on TwinBasic and RadBasic.
The second one is dying (VB-Script) - Microsoft is phasing out this version of VB.
And I think that should have been done years ago, as it is only something to be used by Ransomware parties.
The third one (VB.Net).
Officially? It's alive.
Really? It's dead as the language is not evolving anymore.
But, just like for VB Classic, VB.Net is reviving.
There is a second implementation (Mercury), OpenSilver is 100% supporting VB.Net, enabling VB to do Xaml, WebAssembly and mobile, and former head of VB, Anthony D. Green has started to take up the task of supporting the VB language, adding language structs and features.
So, the answer is Yes and No.
Depending on what you think VB is and if Microsoft support defines dead.
As I see the projects outside Microsoft, VB classic and .Net both have a bright future.
But if you want to depend on MS only, they are both dead.
|
|
|
|
|
Short answer is Nope.
I got flagged a couple of years ago on another forum for answering the same question about PHP. I said they would more than likely be dead before PHP  That was apparently an offensive answer, lol.
Of course, the difference between VB and PHP is that VB.net is a semi-commercial venture by Microsoft, so at the end of the day, it is their call regarding its existence.
Codebase sizes for desktop apps are largely unknown with estimates being based on things like jobs and posted questions. While those two metrics have some relevance, they don't accurately depict the actual usage. For many of those applications, there's little difference between C# and VB. Heck, there's still a bunch of VB6 floating around that still does what it needs to do. Should it be? No, but it can be tough for some organizations to justify (or afford) the expense of converting to C# or even VB.net.
I wouldn't answer this question as strongly as I did the PHP one. The web has become mature enough to handle more apps that were relegated to desktop roles and I've seen more movement in that direction.
|
|
|
|
|
VB enabled many people to learn to code on the job. Was that good or bad? Personally I see it as a win for some people to have gotten into IT Development as you no longer had to be a "computer scientist" to do so. But simultaneously, it made it almost "too easy" to write code, and is likely responsible for some horribly written monolithic systems that likely still exist today.
|
|
|
|
|
I guess it depends on what you mean by "dead".
I'm still using VB.NET for most things. It is my preferred language, although I also have one project in C# that I support.
That being said, I'm a web developer, and Microsoft has pretty much screwed over VB.NET web developers. Very little of the ASP.NET Core things can be written in VB.NET.  Mostly the work I am doing is supporting existing WebForms applications so this hasn't been a big issue for me. But if I was building something new, I'd probably use RemObjects Mercury to take advantage of ASP.NET Core but still be able able to use VB. My clients generally don't care about the language choice, so I can choose whatever I prefer.
I agree that I haven't seen many listed positions for VB.NET these days, although I'm not really looking much so I probably don't have a good feel for that.
There is definitely a small contingent of folks who still love the language and are actively using it, but I suspect we are aging out.
--Avonelle
|
|
|
|
|
Oh the memories! VB6 is the only language I've ever used where functions htonb and ntohb seemed like a bright idea. Had to write my own, of course, and used them to great effect.
Dang! My '58 Renault Dauphine has another flat tire.
|
|
|
|
|
DoEvents. A hole waiting...
|
|
|
|
|
I have been using Visual Basic since "classic" VB 1.0. I jumped to VB.net as soon as it was introduced. I know it like the back of my hand which allows me to get programming assignments done quickly. The thing I like most about this new "Microsoft is not updating VB anymore" policy is this means the language is stable. There's no chance of the latest update causing breaking changes in your line of business apps.
|
|
|
|
|
I've been programming applications for 43 years and the only language I've ever used is Basic.
BasicA, RockyMountain Basic, HP Basic, Apple Basic, TI99/4A Basic, Commadore Basic, Quick Basic, Visual Basic, VB.Net. I've seen them all come and go. I'll be retiring soon but I will miss the fun of programming in my favorite of all language. I think it is a big mistake fort Microsoft to want to end VB DOTNET. They are going to loose lots of creativity to other companies who are currently building development systems to keep the language alive. Check out XOJO for instance. Cross platform applications development in a Basic environment. Basic is still the best environment to start learning computer programming for youngsters.
|
|
|
|
|
I still have one app left in VB that I support still, and regret choosing VB back then. VB is not quite the same as c#, where a long time ago I wrote an API for credit card processing, and the XML output was different than c#, and authentication failed. But somehow I remember how to code in VB every time I have to work on that app. Amazing!
If it ain't broke don't fix it
Discover my world at jkirkerx.com
|
|
|
|
|
Nope, pining for the Fiords... 
|
|
|
|
|
There's no reason to use VB.Net on any new projects anymore, but there's a whole lot of legacy VB.Net out there. And it's not really worth re-writing it in C# unless you're biting the bullet and moving away from WebForms.
I expect it will be supported for a long while yet, because legacy code.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
