VB .NET extreemly slow at everything compared to VB6

hi all,

i installed VB .NET lastnight... and tried to convert my VB6 app.. got forty nine errors..which i was crunching through...

after that... it just didint want to run... am using ADO/Access connection..

anyway.... the main thing is that its damn slow... very slow to compile..very slow to do anything!

on my 850MHZ it took 3 to 4 times longer to compile or run programs!

i found it really slow to work with too!

i think for this.. your gona need above 1.5 GHz or above with probably at least 256 RAM..

anyone shed any light or give their views on this?

Abe

yeah, i loaded .net up on a 1 GHz laptop and noticed the slowness

definitly more power and flexibility though.

Dont be fooled by C# by the way ... it looks like C+, but it compiles to the same common language runtime as VB. Kinda makes you wonder what the point is ... all the unreadability of C+ with the inefficient execution of VB :D ...

Yes, but its really slow to work with. Everytime you get a runtime error it takes a while to unload..then a whille again to load up again after your fixed that little error you such as added that extra word of code you needed or something..

its just annoying coz of that..

i really just hope that I could use VB6 at least for the next year..

Vb .NET is more powerful..but not sutabile for avarage systems today... i guess on a 2GHz and 512 RAM and some super fast hard disk.. and some 21" monitor..etc.. will one feel nice and comfrotable with..

so far i see no evidence that executables built with vb .NET run faster than VB6 (apps with ado connection to database...no net stuff).

Seems really that VB .NETs main advantages or most at least.. are really to do with apps that make use of the internet or have features that uses the net.

Abe

lots of advantages actually, no more registering components, just drop your 3rd party ocx's in the folder with the exe. VB and C# and VC compile to the same runtime language so you can develop multi language apps without all the dll crap (I think).

no more variants ... Dim i, j, k actually dims 3 integers!!!

its a good switch overall, but you are right, its gonna take hardware some time to really catch up.

i have a 1.3mhz and 256 ram (laptop) it work fine... but when i converted my vb6 project it crash again and again.... imagelist control and datareports are not allowe...

i have vb6 and .net loaded on xp home. i really loved thread programing and the ease and speed given to programmer...
yea performance wise the tool is bit slow than vb6... but much better :cool:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by khalik
i have a 1.3mhz and 256 ram (laptop) it work fine... but when i converted my vb6 project it crash again and again.... imagelist control and datareports are not allowe...

i have vb6 and .net loaded on xp home. i really loved thread programing and the ease and speed given to programmer...
yea performance wise the tool is bit slow than vb6... but much better :cool:

---

yeah, that conversion wizard is crap...

yeah but what are you guys using now? Vb6 and .NET?

i really dont know why it takes that long to just compile and build the app.

also noticed that all the words and style are not C++ like... with "Build" and stuff like that..

btw.. how do you make an .exe ??

Abe

vb.net is really a good thing but i think it need some time to settle and be stable but one thing is as a vb programmer u get several advantage what c++/java programmer and now no vb programmer is less ..... :D

.NET running on a 400 mhz..I dont have that problem of slower compiling and applications. Of course I dont use VS .NET which I am guesing you are using. You cant bundle the IDE with the framework as while yes the IDE is slow(but with many options), you can write apps without it. The command line compiler compiles very fast and my equvilant apps in VB6 avs VB .NET are the same speed and in few cases, faster.

Another possible problem is a needed account for .NET is not setup correctly. Make sure in your user account that there is a user called ASPNET (or something like that). Yes, not having this can remendously slow down .NET.

while i don't want to learn .NET just yet because I am still learning all there is to know about VB6 (which i will never know all of) I think it may be a good idea to start learning .NET.. because while still new.. at some point it is going to be the standard... and there will be jobs for .NET programmers.. so if we get a jump start on it.. it may be better in the long run

To make it a bit faster, remove the extra help screen that follows your code, its a right slow down.

Loads fine on my Athlon XP system.

dynamic help IntelliSense it will make time bit fast
and jump to .net i hope that will be the standard and it is in startso its better to start and be equipped with the stuf by the time it get stable :cool:

No more Variants? Well what do you use when you need a variant, something that can accept numeric and string values?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Arc
No more Variants? Well what do you use when you need a variant, something that can accept numeric and string values?

---

An UDT?

Umm that is absurd. Create a UDT in place of a variant?

Let me give you an example.

VB Code:

'A Sub
Public Sub AddItem(Text As Variant)
 
ReDim Preserve ListArray(UBound(ListArray) + 1)
ListArray(UBound(ListArray)) = text
End sub
 
 
'The sub in use. It could accept an Integer or a String. You 
'have no idea which so a Variant is your only option.
 
For i = 0 to 100
Call additem (i)'Accepting an integer
Next
 
OR
 
For i = 0 to 100
Call additem ("SDFSDF")'accepting a string
Next

How would you use a UDT to work with that problem? And even if you could work it out it would be an unecessary bunch of mess.

In that case, you could use the C++ option of overloaded functions. I don't use .NET, so I don't know if they've copied it, but that's how C++ accounts for those sorts of issues.

My suggestion would have been fine for a variant array. Which is where most of my use of variant is.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rjlohan
In that case, you could use the C++ option of overloaded functions. I don't use .NET, so I don't know if they've copied it

---

yeah you can overload in VB.NET

There you go Arc- problem solved. :)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rjlohan
In that case, you could use the C++ option of overloaded functions. I don't use .NET, so I don't know if they've copied it, but that's how C++ accounts for those sorts of issues.

---

I have no idea what a C++ option of overloaded functions means...

That's not my fault is it?

It means you create the same function several times, accounting for the different parameters you wish to pass it.

If you want to use a function with a String argument, the compiler would use the function you created with a String parameter. It's more code, but in the end it is more accurate. Faster, memory-conservant and so on.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rjlohan
That's not my fault is it?

---

Testy aren't we?

According to your description of "Overloading" you could do that in any Language(I'm refering to Mr. Polites comment). So instead of using a variant i would have to write the sub a couple times accepting different values and do all sorts of checking to see what value was entered etc...


That' sounds like a real improvement:rolleyes:

There is no reason to use a variant type int .net. (or in VB6 ex. decimal)

In your example you can just convert the number to a string.


e.g Numer.toString

I havent had time to play, but it probly converts it for you anyway.

There are data structures for all base types, ie, long, string, byte, so if you need something different you create it.

ahh...

I guess we guys just need to read a few VB.NET books and how to do things we used to do in VB6 over to VB.NET...


Abe

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Arc
So instead of using a variant i would have to write the sub a couple times accepting different values and do all sorts of checking to see what value was entered etc...

---

No! You don't have to do any checking. You just create multiple copies of the sub/function using different data types in the arg list. The compiler will generate the code to decide which sub/function to call.

I haven't seen .Net yet, so I don't know the syntax, but it would look something like:

VB Code:

Dim I1 As Integer
   Dim I2 As Integer
   Dim I3 As Integer
   Dim D1 As Double
   Dim D2 As Double
   Dim D3 As Double
 
   I1 = 275
   I2 = 600
   D1 = 1024.5
   D2 = 333333.33
 
   I3 = Sum(I1, I2)
   D3 = Sum(D1, D2) 
 
 
Private Function Sum(Val1 As Double, Val2 As Double) As Double
   
   Sum = Val1 + Val2
 
End Function
 
Private Function Sum(Val1 As Integer, Val2 As Integer) As Integer
   
   Sum = Val1 + Val2
 
End Function

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Arc


Testy aren't we?

According to your description of "Overloading" you could do that in any Language(I'm refering to Mr. Polites comment). So instead of using a variant i would have to write the sub a couple times accepting different values and do all sorts of checking to see what value was entered etc...


That' sounds like a real improvement:rolleyes:

---

That's not at all what I said...:rolleyes:

Try it in VB and see if it works...:rolleyes:

Two functions with the same name and same access (private/public) will cause a compile error....:rolleyes:



:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Muddy
lots of advantages actually, no more registering components, just drop your 3rd party ocx's in the folder with the exe. VB and C# and VC compile to the same runtime language so you can develop multi language apps without all the dll crap (I think).

---

This you can already do in vb6. Add ocx to exe directory you dont need to register it.

Variants in VB 6 is comparable to Objects in VB .NET

Instead of dim v as variant, you would do dim v as object. All the variants are converted to objects.

Hope this helps