[RESOLVED] !! About the new type of Single Language MSDN that I am making for Microsoft !!

I like your website, but I think each page should have music when it loads. That will make it even better.

Thanks

-- Actually, I'm working on a Splash Screen for when it loads the screen, so then that could be where I add the music, cool!! Thanks for the Input$...

Unfortunately this

Quote:

---

CodeBank Page: Coming Really Soon...

---

means I'm not going to try out your stuff. Don't get me wrong, I can see loads of perfectly good reasons why people don't like to share their code (the obvious one being that you don't want anyone to steal it) but the flip side for people like me is that you're essentially asking me to install something on my machine with absolutely no way of knowing it's safe to do so. It could be anything. I've got all sorts of stuff on my machine I can't afford to lose so the risk's just too great, even if I trust you.

If you can find a way of providing that assurance without exposing your code I'd be happy to try stuff out. I can't think of a way of providing that assurance without seeing the code though.

Debug the EXE file, with an External Debugger but then you have to run it on some kind of machine...

Here is some of Source Code, it's the CodeWindow Form and also the MSDN Library. Also included is the MSDN Documents that appear inside the MSDN Console...

-- Please note: When I say Source Code and MSDN Library, I am refering to the one that I am going to GIVE to Microsoft...

I suppose I'm late to the party, but this "new VB" that you were referring to... I think it came out already. It's called "VB.NET" and it's been around for... only 10 years now, I think?

Anyway, subscribed!

Damn, I've no longer got VB6 installed and can't find my old disk. I could have sworn I still had it. Anyway, I downloaded your stuff and opened it up in notepad (boy that took me back) and I think I can start to understand what you're trying to do.

Essentially, you seem to be writing an alternative IDE that's got some extra features in, so it'll create place holders for subs automatically and it's got some winsock connecivity built in, that sort of thing. Is that right? If so I applaud the effort but I do think you're going the hard way about it. You've got an awful lot of code there that just mimics stuff that was built into Visual Studio already, the code colouration for example. That's alot of effort when you could have just written add ins for Visual Studio, getting all of it's functionality for free while adding your own features on top.

If you're open to some criticism on your coding style, two things jumped out at me. 1. Alot of your variable are declared at form level when they're only used within a single method. You should always declare variables at the lowest scope possible. 2. You've got at least one 'On Error Resume Next' in there. Get rid of it and handle your errors properly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FunkyDexter

2. You've got at least one 'On Error Resume Next' in there. Get rid of it and handle your errors properly.

---

It's VB6, so THAT's not gonna happen. On Error Resume Next was problematic back then, but none of the alternatives were all that good, either. It would be the same as quietly absorbing an exception in .NET, which is occasionally even the right thing to do.

NNNNNNNNnnnnnnnnnnooooooooooooooooooo!!!!! :p

It's not absorbing an error; it's absorbing all errors. Don't get me wrong, I can see the argument for absorbing the occasional error you genuinely know you can ignore but you ought to know what the error is first. Absorbing a "File Not Open" Error when closing a file would be a good example. But On Error Resume Next is saying, I don't care what error occurs, I'm going to ignore it. The very least you should do in VB6 is use On Error Goto, check the error code and issue a resume next from the error handler if it's an error you really don't care about.

And just 'cause I can't resist it:-

There was an On Error Resume Next
Which made some developers quite vexed
Shaggy's not bothered
but the errors hovered
and came back to haunt Funky Dext...


... er

While hiding all errors in a go
Causes trouble and hides bugs also
The point of my text
Which was missed by vexed Dex
Was: Only hide those exceptions you know.

I can only think of one situation where quietly swallowing an exception made sense, but there IS that one situation: Exceptions raised by invalid UDP packets can typically be ignored.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

While hiding all errors in a go
Causes trouble and hides bugs also
The point of my text
Which was missed by vexed Dex
Was: Only hide those exceptions you know.

I can only think of one situation where quietly swallowing an exception made sense, but there IS that one situation: Exceptions raised by invalid UDP packets can typically be ignored.

---

Limerick +1. I should start answering everything like that.

God this is such an epic thread :bigyello:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThEiMp

-- Actually, I'm working on a Splash Screen for when it loads the screen, so then that could be where I add the music, cool!! Thanks for the Input$...

---

http://www.w3.org/QA/Tips/noClickHere

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FunkyDexter

But On Error Resume Next is saying, I don't care what error occurs, I'm going to ignore it. The very least you should do in VB6 is use On Error Goto, check the error code and issue a resume next from the error handler if it's an error you really don't care about.

---

Well, you could do an inline error handling for the errors you expected, where the On Error Resume Next would be a perfectly justified way of handing errors. It's like executing a statement and then checking the error code or status code on the next line to check if the last statement executed without errors.

Sorry to post something serious. I am not entirely sure it's right to do that.

.

Quote:

---

Exceptions raised by invalid UDP packets can typically be ignored

---

I know absolutely nothing about that so can't really comment. Let me see if I can clarify where I'm coming from a bit because I'm not sure whether we're arguing the same point or not. I'll probably get the syntax wrong so bear with me.

This is obviously wrong:-

Code:

---

'Program starts Here
On Error Resume Next
...
'Loads of lines of code

---

That's just turning error handling off. I imagine we're probaly in agreement on that though.

This isn't as wrong but I would argue is still bad practice:-

Code:

---

...
On Error Goto MyHandler
'Various bits of code I'm handling correctly
...
On Error Resume Next 'Skip any errors because I don't care if the files already closed
File.Close
On Error Goto MyHandler
'More bit of code I'm handling correctly.

---

I used to come across that alot in my VB6 days but I still think it's bad because you don't actually know that the error being thrown is that the file is already closed. The error could be something completely different and this will carry on regardless. I guess there may be some situations where a particular line of code can only throw one type of error and you're happy to ignore it, but even then you don't know the underlying implementation won't change at some point.

I would argue that this is correct:0

Code:

---

On Error goto MyGeneralHandler
...Various Lines of code being correctly handled
On Error goto myFileCloseHandler
File.Close
On Error goto MyGeneralHandler
... more lines of code being correctly handled

MyFileCloseHandler:
If Error.code = "File Already Closed" 'Or whatever the error code for that was
  Resume Next

MyGeneralHandler:
'Do whatever error handling you'd normally do here

---

Here you're making sure the error is the one you want to consume before you consume it. Having a separate handler may or may not be apropriate, depending on the situation, but the point is to check the error first and make sure it's the one you think it is.

Quote:

---

Well, you could do an inline error handling for the errors you expected, where the On Error Resume Next would be a perfectly justified way of handing errors.

---

I've seen that argued a lot and disagree I'm afraid. It means your just ignoring any error you weren't expecting... and they're the really dangerous ones. I guess you could check for any error after every line of code but that seems awefully innefficient to me.



The Shaggy v Funky Rhyme Battle
Played out 'fore the VBF cattle
The puns were displaced
by formed rhymes in their place
But I aint got a final line that'll...

...scan correctly


Turns out I'm not very good at limericks. And I don't really think the VBFers are cattle but, hey, you try coming up with a rhyme for battle just after you've eaten lunch.

I'm in agreement with FD on this... I've seen cases were apps failed in a spectacular way because at the top was (correctly) the On Error Goto errHnadlerXYZ .... then in the middle of the routing someone snuck in an OERN ... to handle a specific event, then FAILED to reset the original error handler. Things became even more complicated as we're going through the error handler to find out what was going wrong, not knowing there was an OERN... it was justbad juju all around.

-tg

In general, I too, agree on all those points. My position is this:

1) I know of one or two situations where that would be ok.
2) I didn't download the code in question, nor do I have the means to look at it, so I'm not going to.

Considering that #2 is True, I can't categorically state whether the practice in this case is wrong. However, this part is certainly true:

3) I can probably find a nit to pick with just about anything.

As #3 is clearly true, I think I shall say no more about it other that this: It is a very rare situation where it is acceptable to quietly swallow an exception, but they do exist. Try as I might to find an errant situation where it would make sense to Catch as exception...End Try.



Funky D called VB folks Cattle
He thought it to be idle prattle
It was not his end
To people, offend
So on him, I clearly won't tattle.

Quote:

---

I can probably find a nit to pick with just about anything.

---

I'm willing to bet that's a particular problem by the end of a hiking trip.

Quote:

---

Funky D called VB folks Cattle
He thought it to be idle prattle
It was not his end
To people, offend
So on him, I clearly won't tattle.

---

Show off:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FunkyDexter

I'm willing to bet that's a particular problem by the end of a hiking trip.

---

Nah, they've all drowned.

Quote:

---

Show off:)

---

Quite!!

Gee sorry that I fell asleep, because of the members posting on my Thread!! This is the first night's sleep for about since Feburary '12!! I now usually sleep in the day time, not at night because of the time thing on this Forum...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThEiMp

Gee sorry that I fell asleep, because of the members posting on my Thread!! This is the first night's sleep for about since Feburary '12!! I now usually sleep in the day time, not at night because of the time thing on this Forum...

---

What were you doing at night ? ;)

http://img861.imageshack.us/img861/5497/draculan.png
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/861/draculan.png/

Partying ? :D
(just kidding)

:wave:

Working on the computer, either paper work, pesudo code, working offline and then eating dinner at 12:00pm, Perth time!!

You can reach my free products, at the following link on my Forum Member's Signature. I hope that you enjoy the products, and then can you please post the feedback on this Thread. That would really be nice, if you could do so. But you have to say, as to which one you are emplying about...

Please look further into this Thread, cause of there being a newer more up to date version of the Product...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FunkyDexter

I know absolutely nothing about that so can't really comment. Let me see if I can clarify where I'm coming from a bit because I'm not sure whether we're arguing the same point or not. I'll probably get the syntax wrong so bear with me.

This is obviously wrong:-

Code:

---

'Program starts Here
On Error Resume Next
...
'Loads of lines of code

---

That's just turning error handling off. I imagine we're probaly in agreement on that though.

This isn't as wrong but I would argue is still bad practice:-

Code:

---

...
On Error Goto MyHandler
'Various bits of code I'm handling correctly
...
On Error Resume Next 'Skip any errors because I don't care if the files already closed
File.Close
On Error Goto MyHandler
'More bit of code I'm handling correctly.

---

I used to come across that alot in my VB6 days but I still think it's bad because you don't actually know that the error being thrown is that the file is already closed. The error could be something completely different and this will carry on regardless. I guess there may be some situations where a particular line of code can only throw one type of error and you're happy to ignore it, but even then you don't know the underlying implementation won't change at some point.

I would argue that this is correct:0

Code:

---

On Error goto MyGeneralHandler
...Various Lines of code being correctly handled
On Error goto myFileCloseHandler
File.Close
On Error goto MyGeneralHandler
... more lines of code being correctly handled

MyFileCloseHandler:
If Error.code = "File Already Closed" 'Or whatever the error code for that was
  Resume Next

MyGeneralHandler:
'Do whatever error handling you'd normally do here

---

Here you're making sure the error is the one you want to consume before you consume it. Having a separate handler may or may not be apropriate, depending on the situation, but the point is to check the error first and make sure it's the one you think it is.


I've seen that argued a lot and disagree I'm afraid. It means your just ignoring any error you weren't expecting... and they're the really dangerous ones. I guess you could check for any error after every line of code but that seems awefully innefficient to me.



The Shaggy v Funky Rhyme Battle
Played out 'fore the VBF cattle
The puns were displaced
by formed rhymes in their place
But I aint got a final line that'll...

...scan correctly


Turns out I'm not very good at limericks. And I don't really think the VBFers are cattle but, hey, you try coming up with a rhyme for battle just after you've eaten lunch.

---

In VBScript, On Error Resume Next is the only way to do error handling, there is no On Error Goto. I would agree though, I cannot think of a reason why you should use it aside from being lazy, I have used it when I don't care about the error e.g. deleting a temporary you never intend to use again within an error handler, I try not to use nested error handling in VB. But I can still think of reasons why that would be bad (like the program is not releasing the file handle and if the process is iterative or repeated often it might max out the number of file handlers a program can have).

Yes, but then there are simple errors like some sort of lines, like: "Cannot find file," when loading the DialogBox inside my CustomDialogBox, of ActiveX Control Objects...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FunkyDexter

I've seen that argued a lot and disagree I'm afraid. It means your just ignoring any error you weren't expecting... and they're the really dangerous ones. I guess you could check for any error after every line of code but that seems awefully innefficient to me.

---

In most cases you aren't really looking for several different types of errors to be thrown. So if I were doing a file I/O there would be just about two or three types of errors I have to handle. Thankfully the days are gone where before every memory allocation you had to watch for the available free memory. So theoretically it's still very much possible to use inline error handling. After all that's exactly what we do in SQL or when calling the APIs, so why should it be wrong in VB6?

The trouble is that not everyone is disciplined enough to do it diligently.

.

hehe ,, We aren't so structured in VB6 COM. But then why should we be that way, for being so many years not being???

Please look further into this Thread, so that you can then be able to Download the exactly the most up to date version of the Project Files...

Is it possible - this is just a random thought, mind you! - to rewrite whatever you have written in one of the modern technology platforms, such as maybe Dotnet?

.

I'm sure Microsoft programming teams can't wait to get their hands on this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by honeybee

Is it possible - this is just a random thought, mind you! - to rewrite whatever you have written in one of the modern technology platforms, such as maybe Dotnet?

---

I agree. Sounds like you're truly ready to be a .Net programmer.

Well they chop and change very quickly like getting up to C#, that was very unsounded like...

I can't parse that statement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

I can't parse that statement.

---

I got an exception:-
http://i40.tinypic.com/20p7okh.png

LOL @ Niya - I they allowed points for Chit-Chat ... you certainly would get some from me.... that's..... just brilliant.

-tg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by techgnome

LOL @ Niya - I they allowed points for Chit-Chat ... you certainly would get some from me.... that's..... just brilliant.

-tg

---

Haha, Shaggy's comment reminded me of how TryParse would silently fail when it cannot convert. Before coming here, I've always used functions like CInt to convert which throws exceptions when a conversion cannot be made. That how I came up with that lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by visualAd

In VBScript, On Error Resume Next is the only way to do error handling, there is no On Error Goto. I would agree though, I cannot think of a reason why you should use it aside from being lazy, I have used it when I don't care about the error e.g. deleting a temporary you never intend to use again within an error handler, I try not to use nested error handling in VB. But I can still think of reasons why that would be bad (like the program is not releasing the file handle and if the process is iterative or repeated often it might max out the number of file handlers a program can have).

---

I somewhat recall On Error GoTo 0 in VBScript... all though all it did was disable error handling totally ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Niya

Haha, Shaggy's comment reminded me of how TryParse would silently fail when it cannot convert. Before coming here, I've always used functions like CInt to convert which throws exceptions when a conversion cannot be made. That how I came up with that lol

---

TryParse isn't supposed to throw exceptions. That is why it accepts the result variable ByRef as a parameter. So it can return True/False if the parse was successful or not. Why would you want it to throw an exception? That is what the regular Parse method is there for. In fact TryParse was added later on after Parse, for the exact reason of the want to try to parse something without having to setup try/catch error handling around it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kleinma

TryParse isn't supposed to throw exceptions. That is why it accepts the result variable ByRef as a parameter. So it can return True/False if the parse was successful or not. Why would you want it to throw an exception? That is what the regular Parse method is there for. In fact TryParse was added later on after Parse, for the exact reason of the want to try to parse something without having to setup try/catch error handling around it.

---

I know. I would always use other forms of validation before passing it to functions like CInt. For example I'd often wrap a conversion that is meant to convert a String to an Integer in an If...Then block that tests the String using IsNumeric before attempting to convert to avoid the exceptions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Niya

I got an exception:-
http://i40.tinypic.com/20p7okh.png

---

:lol::lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kleinma

I somewhat recall On Error GoTo 0 in VBScript... all though all it did was disable error handling totally ;)

---

I've seen that a few times, there is an assumption that it changes the error handler back to what you had before. I have also seen an On Error Goto xx and the label xx just is at the end of the routine with only an Exit Sub / Function.

I still use VB (I mean VBA) on a daily basis as MS Access and Excel seem to be the tools of choice for large financial institutions. They also favour using cowboys to build the tools then get expensive people like me in to fix the mess. :D

Quote:

---

then get expensive people like me in to fix the mess

---

So that's where all our money went. Give it back, you.

I don't get it, the company I work for does. They rake in about 1200% more than I get paid. :(

I agree with TG: I have never been tempted to rate a post in CC, but that one would be the first. That was really well done.

hehe ,, That On Errror GoTo, was something that I took very lightly, in deed!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by visualAd

I don't get it, the company I work for does. They rake in about 1200% more than I get paid. :(

---

Well I make nothing for every Project that I work on. Also I don't get paid for my work. So then that kind of profit, is then considered a gold mine!!

-- Please check further into this Thread, so that you are able to download the newer versions of the Project that I am working on!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThEiMp

Well I make nothing for every Project that I work on. Also I don't get paid for my work. So then that kind of profit, is then considered a gold mine!!

---

Well I have heard about PCI busians and their cacheless economy. I am not a fan of PCI bus though, the last time I went there it was really hot and datasaurus' kept taking bytes out of me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by visualad

well i have heard about pci busians and their cacheless economy. I am not a fan of pci bus though, the last time i went there it was really hot and datasaurus' kept taking bytes out of me.

---

+500

Not sure what you guys are talking about. I only wrote that many years ago, as per the normal bus at the time was: PCI Bus and then not anymore, in fact of the matter...

@ thEiMp,

That horoscope image could be a bit smaller! On your website it is annoying to have to adjust your view because the part of the page with info on it is halfway down the page that image is way to big.

You mean the Sun Signs on the main index.htm page, right???

Please look further into this Thread, cause there being a newer version of the Product...

So this "new Single Language" thing is about programming via devination?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThEiMp

hehe ,, That On Errror GoTo, was something that I took very lightly, in deed!!

---

One more reason for us to not try your code for we may catch something and finally realize it was all wrong.

.

Why not??? There isn't anything wrong. It's only Source Code, you can open it up in Notepad, therefore you can not catch anything from the Code. Also the Controls are genuine and that there are only two of the ActiveX Control Objects, that I have written they are, as follows: The CustomDialogBox and the PlusMinus Control. Please note that they have been included inside the QuickDirector Express Project Files ZIP. But the PlusMinus Control, has been embedded into the Project Files, and therefore you will then be able to review it after I have been able to release it in time. That is all I need to have this Project finished, and then posted on the Internet in this very Forum, really postive maybe there for the Source Code, at that...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ThEiMp

You mean the Sun Signs on the main index.htm page, right???

---

What I see when I look at the main index page is a white rectangle then a scrollable section below it. The white rectangle had a advert on it (in my case it seems to be an ad for Pantene aqua Light).

What on earth is this all about?

This should explain it