|
Ha ha.
That would be...
Dim Bob as Employee OfCompany Motorola
Nigel
|
|
|
|
|
I'm just not sure how you'd conjugate the verbs in VB. And if your variable started with a vowel would you contract the article?
D'employee as Employee of Company Motorola
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: I'm so gonna get some hate mail for that.
i won't, because i simply know the good people here (the ones who make true jokes but can have in an other time a serious thinking about a subjet).
but come on Chris, what did you have i mind when you wrote this ? 
|
|
|
|
|
I hardly ever had any chance to use VB in my work, C++ and C# always met all my needs. But at onr point VB.NET still beats C# flat - COM interop with MS Office. C# lacks IMHO one thing - default parameters, and without it Office interop is often uncomfortable, sometimes nearly impossible. But that's the only thing that VB does better and even this is spoiled with a clumsy syntax  so I avoid it as much as possible.
|
|
|
|
|
I've been developing in VB.NET 2005 for the past 6 months. It is my unquantifiable opinion that the language support for VB.NET is more brittle than the C# support in Visual Studio 2005. I have seen way to many crashes relating to the VB compiler, etc.
Also the language support doesn't seem quite there either for VB.NET. There's not nearly as many refactorings (is that a word??) for VB.NET as there are for C# (unless you donwload the Refactor plugin which also seems a little clunky).
Anyways, that's my $0.02 on VB.NET.
And I can't help but saying there's a missing option, "I use VB.NET, but against my will" 
|
|
|
|
|
Someone once said the only programmers that are better than VB programmers are those who code in 1's and 0's.....
Regards
Programm3r
|
|
|
|
|
Laugh I nearly pee'd myself...
We made the buttons on the screen look so good you'll want to lick them. Steve Jobs
|
|
|
|
|
ok, i consider then than you are a VB programmer, if you don't mind...
BTW, i strongly prefer my C++ instead, but all is a matter of perception and habits i believe.
|
|
|
|
|
 Some one said "VB is a programming language that any idiot can program badly"...
Have a nice life!!
|
|
|
|
|
The same can be said about any language.
"Time sneaks up on you like a windshield on a bug."
- John Lithgow
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
Having loyalty to one programming language or another is like having loyalty to a specific vendor. I (and assuming you too) don’t force yourself to buy gas from specific gas station. The minute your car is out of gas you simply drive up to the closest gas station to fill up your car. Now if the price or quality of the gas is at question you may look around for stations with the preferred quality.
The same scenario is valid for choice of programming language. The essence of being able to build systems by capitalizing on your company resources (vb programmers, C#, or any other languages) to deliver a quality product to the customer is a core value added by adopting the Dot Net programming model.
I am surprised to get this question in the pool, unless there are insiders information regarding the future of the language. I believe the need for language specific loyalty is long dead since the introduction of dot net.
Cheers
Raz
It is Illogical to define an inventor by his invention
|
|
|
|
|
Somebody said... jeez what a remark! How about your own opinions?
We made the buttons on the screen look so good you'll want to lick them. Steve Jobs
|
|
|
|
|
Let me start off by saying that I believe it is possible to write good applications using VB6 if you have people with the right talent and VB6's syntax is suitable for the application. I also believe that it is also possible to be a bad programmer in C, C++, C#, or any other language. And I believe that C and C++ are not the best languages for all applications. I just happen to believe that Visual Basic has a higher number of self-delusioned programmers using the language than more terse languages like C++.
One thing I really appreciated about VB6 (and VB5) is that it allowed people who were not programmers to write programs when they had to. This is very important in my company's industry. But these people always understood that they were not programmers - nor did they want to be.
While I appreciate how .NET allows a library to be used with similar syntax in VB as in C# and C++/CLI (and other .NET languages), I am saddened (slightly) that VB has become more formal. This formality makes it more difficult for my company's target audience to use our hardware. VB6 was much easier for these customers to use. Oh well
- Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
Problem is VB is too easy to use, hence people with non programming backgrounds (similar to whats happening to to the web) moving into programming. These are the people who write horrendous applications, mainly down to bad user interfaces. The reason why there are fewer bad programmers using C/C++ and to a lesser C#, is down the learning curve needed to use these languages.
KevinHall wrote: One thing I really appreciated about VB6 (and VB5) is that it allowed people who were not programmers to write programs when they had to. This is very important in my company's industry. But these people always understood that they were not programmers - nor did they want to be.
Not from my experience, people (non programmers) were jumping on the IT bandwagon some even become contractors, down to the big £££'s and lack of professionals need to fill gaps in the IT market (UK, '90s).
Still being an experienced Win32/MFC/ATL ect, I wouldn't .net has made things easier the framework alone will take a lifetime to learn, and I suppose that's why people from VB/MFC backgrounds are not prepared to go through that whole learning curve again, but thats what our industry is about, you can't cling on to outdated technology forever, something new always replaces what you been using for years.
Anyway if your experienced and gone through training/college/university, it probably doesn't matter what language you use as long as it fits the job it's designed for.
We made the buttons on the screen look so good you'll want to lick them. Steve Jobs
|
|
|
|
|
norm .net wrote: The reason why there are fewer bad programmers using C/C++ and to a lesser C#, is down the learning curve needed to use these languages.
Yep! That's why I said "I just happen to believe that Visual Basic has a higher number of self-delusioned programmers using the language than more terse languages like C++."
norm .net wrote: Not from my experience, people (non programmers) were jumping on the IT bandwagon some even become contractors, down to the big £££'s and lack of professionals need to fill gaps in the IT market (UK, '90s).
I don't disagree. I expect most programmers to have this type of experience. But my company's industry is different and very narrow -- most people are mechanical engineers, integrators, and the like. The industy has historically not used computers very much, but in order to keep costs down and raise performance the industry is using more and more computer controlled equipment. The engineers and integrators like their job and programming is a hassle for them. These people really do need something like VB 6.0 to allow simple programs to be written. Our larger customers have the resources to hire real programmers who are all too happy to program using our C and C++ libraries. But most of our customers are very small and cannot afford a full-time programmer (nor do they really need the expertise of one for the level of work they do).
|
|
|
|
|
"it allowed people who were not programmers to write programs when they had to."
"What we have here is a bad precedent." - Dilbert
Grim (aka Toby) MCDBA, MCSD, MCP+SB
SELECT * FROM users WHERE clue IS NOT NULL
GO
(0 row(s) affected)
|
|
|
|
|
That's an elitist attitude. Most technical fields (and even many non-technical fields) now days require some sort of interaction with a computer. And many of these people find that they need to customize some part of what they do, BUT they are not programmers by trade. For example:
- The photographer who wants to write scripts to automate auto-contrast for a batch of photos.
- The lab technician who needs to change how long a particular chemical or biological sample spends in a chamber or oven.
- The mechanical engineer (working for a newspaper printer) who needs to change how a virtual camming system works.
Should these people hire a programmer every time they need to change something?
I can hear some people already thinking "well, the user interface should be made flexible enough for non-programmers to tweak how they work". That sounds good and well, but without some simple type of programming, making the interface flexible becomes extremely difficult and complex. That's why Microsoft Office has VBA and why many other applications have some sort of scripting interface.
|
|
|
|
|
- The first example is a macro, not a program
- The second example is a configuration option or a UI input, not a program
- The third example isn't well-enough defined to judge whether it should be a custom program or a configuration issue
The problem is that when non-programmers write programs, more often than not the actual programmers in the company end up wasting way too much time supporting badly written software that they don't even "own."
VBA is a glorified macro language, as are most of the other scripting systems to which you refer.
Grim (aka Toby) MCDBA, MCSD, MCP+SB
SELECT * FROM users WHERE clue IS NOT NULL
GO
(0 row(s) affected)
|
|
|
|
|
You're assuming a lot about what environment people are actually using.
For the first example: There are *nix programs that perform photo auto-contrasting. Someone could use the Python language to perform the action. They don't have to use PhotoShop (or GIMP) macros.
For the 2nd example: There could be a UI input on a larger program. But what if the program is small -- small enough not to warrant hiring a professional programmer -- and there wasn't at that time a UI input? If the program were written in a simple language, then the technician could change the time in a matter of minutes rather than waiting 2 weeks for a requisition to go through to bring a contractor in to make the change.
I also disagree with your definition of a language -- and maybe that is where we are getting confused. But to use your terminology: VB6 is a great macro language. It is more flexible than other "languages", and allows someone to put together a simple GUI.
And for the record, I've also seen VB6 used very effectively as prototyping tool. This is a conversation I've heard many times: "hey, look, I was able to piece this thing together to help me out with _______, but other people think really like it. Can you make it into a real product?" VB6 was what these people used to create the prototypes.
|
|
|
|
|
I have programmed from BASIC to VB.NET. They all have there place. I never learned C# but looking at the code vs. VB it is not that different (to read). I took a course in C++ but never used it thus I have forgotten most of it. Basic does not have that problem.
As a programmer I use what the employer wants, good or bad. So far VB has been a good employment tool. (I rather be SQL programming).
DJJ
|
|
|
|
|
Program in C#, I have used both vb.net and C# 2005. I find that C# has everything that vb.net does and more. C# might take a while to learn, but when you do its a execelent language
I can have my cake and eat it too.
|
|
|
|
|
It is such a f**king language with i have worked with...
Nishit
|
|
|
|
|
If it's such a #### language, why did you use it?
C/C++ is a much more advanced language, why didn't you use it?
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
he didnt use it becuase he is to lazy