|
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?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Niiiiiiiisssssshhhhhhuuuuuuu wrote: It is such a f**king language with i have worked with...
ok, that's why it is in your Interrests[^] list, hu ?
|
|
|
|
|
I develop a library to be used by Visual Basic users and thus must write test code in VB. However my main development effort is in C++.
|
|
|
|
|
But surely if it's a COM based library (control or interface) then does it really matter which language you use?
We made the buttons on the screen look so good you'll want to lick them. Steve Jobs
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, it most certainly does matter! I am writing an adapter interface for a C library that uses pointers and unions everywhere.
And by the way, the library used to be a COM library, but now I'm developing a .NET library for our VB.NET users. For this, I'm using C++/CLI.
|
|
|
|
|
In that case "I use VB6 but not VB.NET"
Unless of course you consume the objects in VB.NET using CCW's.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
There is a lot of "VB.Net is bad" comments in here so I would like state the obvious. It’s up to the programmer to write good or poor code. You can do it in VB.Net or C#, it’s up to you.
I can’t help but feel that some comments here are more about people wanting to feel good about themselves because they use a “better” programming language, rather then just criticism.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, I expected this topic to degenerate into a fruitless anti-VB rant. My background is mainly C++, but I've done a fair bit of VB classic. In .NET I've used mainly C#, but have done VB .NET for the past six months. Main problem I've found is that IDE behaviour tends to be more streamlined for C#. That's more irritating than syntax differences.
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
hertz_j wrote: It’s up to the programmer to write good or poor code. You can do it in VB.Net or C#, it’s up to you.
That's my opinion too. You can even code with C++ crapy C-Code (another prejudice...), so where's the argument? 
As a german coder i feel very very comfortable with VB .NET, cause there are no "{}[]\" syntax-chars, so i don't have to Ctlr+Alt+7, +8, ... (german keyboard layout). This is a great improvment of typing speed.
Since .NET there are mainly no differences (of course there are some) between VB.Net and C# besides the syntax (we have the += operator, too  ).
It's up to you, to write good code, not a question of the "right" language...
|
|
|
|
|
...I went to the library and found the book "my first BASIC program".
That was really great, I discovered a whole new world.
But one day, also long ago, there were colourful windows and devices that made clickiclickiclick. Could that be another world to explore? Little Coco tried to enter the clickety-world with the toy she knew: BASIC. That's how I stumbled into using VisualBasic.
In the light of colourful windows, I woke up and saw the new toys: Lots of better languages that seemed to cause less headaches. First I tried the language with the most beautiful name: JAVA! Java was cool, little Coco could embed applets into her first little homepage. One beautiful day, she actually understood classes and objects.
Later on, real life reached me and I had to learn Delphi, then C# was rising at my digital horizon. Those are my "real life languages". VisualBasic was a nice learning language for my first few thousand lines of code.
That's why I won't kick kiddies for using VB - I'll be silent and hope that they'll grow up. 
____________________________________
There is no proof for this sentence.
|
|
|
|
|
I've never seen a single line of Delphi in my whole life, but I heard "rumors" that it produces very lightweight applications. Is that true?
________________________________________________
Tozzi is right: Gaia is getting rid of us.
Personal Blog [ITA] - Tech Blog [ENG]
Developing ScrewTurn Wiki 1.0 RC, now with AJAX Preview.
|
|
|
|
|
Delphi produces very compact executables. You can choose which libraries it should compile into the .exe and which will expected to exist on the user's machine. A small application can have an .exe file of 2 MB, but it will run without any installation, because all components are compressed inside that one file. With other compiler settings, the same application can have an .exe of a 1 KB, but you'll have to install a whole lot of component libraries.
____________________________________
There is no proof for this sentence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
you could always try Delphi.Net - the change from native to .net is via single include !
|
|
|
|
|
.NET executables are pretty small. Thinking about it, .NET pretty much did what Delphi has done few years, allow you package components and code into external libraries.
Word of advice though, don't even bother trying to write a fair sized application in Delphi for NET, the IDE is horribly unstable and is greedy for memory. You would be better of using C# Builder (which we are using with great success), or VS of course.
|
|
|
|
|
Good ol' Delphi. It was a great language/compiler ... the only reason we're not all Delphi developers is that Borland was lacking the corporate marketing power of Microsoft.
But that's just my two cents and probably nowhere near accurate ...
|
|
|
|
|
My first language was C#... so i do kick kiddies;) for using VB 
I can have my cake and eat it too.
|
|
|
|
|
...and I kick you for knowing too few programming languages.
You're lacking experience, kiddie!
____________________________________
There is no proof for this sentence.
|
|
|
|
|
I've seen (not used) every version of VB (even VB for DOS), I've got to say the thing I hate most about VB is the syntax, it's ugly, apart from VB.net, VB was never an OO language and people abused it for it's easy of use and allowed unqualified users to become programmers overnight was generally gave VB a bad name because of the horrendous applications that were created.
We made the buttons on the screen look so good you'll want to lick them. Steve Jobs
|
|
|
|
|
With you on the syntax . I came from assembler to C . C was nice , such a clean syntax . Then C++ , similarly nice and clean . Then VC++ , ok now it gets murkey , the language is ok but MFC has some dodgy choices . Then came C# , nice and clean with a class library written by a team who understood how developers think. But C# V2 (This time its personal) is starting to worry me , can't put my finger on it but its starting to feel like it there is a VB mind in the background somwhere with a few more options arbitrarily dropped in . If we end up supporting 1 based arrays , thats it I'm off to Java land .
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
he didnt use it becuase he is to lazy
