VB6 to .NET

[FrannDzs]

Hi guys, how are you? I hope you are well.

I found a link to Visual Basic Upgrade Companion, which is used to upgrade VB6 projects to .NET Core or .NET Framework.

The link are encoded to Base64:
-encoded link removed-

I hope you find it useful.

[DaveDavis]

setup.exe ???
What is it? Nobody dare to open.

[FrannDzs]

You can try in a virtual machine

[Niya]

It might be 50 years from now before we have an AI capable of converting VB6 projects to .Net Core. This is not something that can be automated with even the most advanced heuristics today. Who ever is making claims to be able to automate this conversion is lying to you.

[FrannDzs]

It might be 50 years from now before we have an AI capable of converting VB6 projects to .Net Core. This is not something that can be automated with even the most advanced heuristics today. Who ever is making claims to be able to automate this conversion is lying to you.

Of course it is not automatic. Human intervention is always needed, but this helps a lot in the conversion. Did you try the TRIAL version?

**Github's Copilot is just the beginning. We can expect some of that much sooner, in my opinion.

[Niya]

Did you try the TRIAL version?

Nah. My experience with this kind of tech is that while impressive, still isn't good enough for practical use. It's better to just bite the bullet and rewrite manually.

[FrannDzs]

Nah. My experience with this kind of tech is that while impressive, still isn't good enough for practical use. It's better to just bite the bullet and rewrite manually.

Well, we all have a personal opinion. I believe that technology has advanced and no longer as it is the old updater that came in Visual Studio 2008. It is worth a try. Also it depends on the lines that your project has, it is not always viable, with this you can give it a try.Attachment 185269
Attachment 185270

[Niya]

Well, we all have a personal opinion. I believe that technology has advanced and no longer as it is the old updater that came in Visual Studio 2008. It is worth a try. Also it depends on the lines that your project has, it is not always viable, with this you can give it a try.Attachment 185269
Attachment 185270

Those links don't work. This site has a bug with attachments like that. Besides, I don't just run unknown EXEs on my PC like that. If this is a product someone is selling and they have a website, link that instead and I may check it out.

[dilettante]

I can remember back in the day when there was a push to get Cobol68 programs converted to Cobol74 back in the late 1980s when the Cobol68 compiler went out of support.

Those languages operated within a few very narrow paradigms, call them "project types," and both the syntax and semantics were very, very close. Yet even so the tools to perform automatic conversions were a disaster.

At the bonehead "line of code at a time" level 90% of "programmers" operate at sure, they could translate over 95% of the source code. But then you had the part left over to do manually... and worse yet all of the hidden flaws in the automatically translated part.

There were very few programs that converted automatically well enough to be worth manual fixup after the fact.

It turned out the the best results required programmers who knew both languages and what the programs were supposed to do. Even with testing to find translation bugs there were problems that slipped through and still turned up for years. It was a long and drawn out process as big as the later "Y2K" problem but without any patience or investment to support it. Management said "just suck it up."

At least with Y2K management could hire "expert" consultants and outsourced coders. That only prolonged the effort and increased the cost, but at least that process paid them in kickbacks and stock options and future sinecure gigs.

VB to VB.Net can be another order of magnitude harder for a lot of reasons. But like those old Cobol programs the originals tend to have been hacked together originally by neophytes and then been patched and patched and patched to fix old bugs and adapt to new requirements. In both cases understanding the programs before trying to convert them can be quite a challenge.

[FrannDzs]

Those links don't work. This site has a bug with attachments like that. Besides, I don't just run unknown EXEs on my PC like that. If this is a product someone is selling and they have a website, link that instead and I may check it out.

The attached files are screenshots to show partners and comments from people who have used it. There is no setup.exe.
"I don't run unknown EXEs on my PC that way".

I have not forced you to do it either. You can take it or leave it. It is as simple as that. Also, you said that in your experience the software is no good, even though you don't know very well what the program is nor have you tried it before. How can you say that if you don't know what we are talking about? If you are curious as it is natural in human beings, go ahead, you can look for more information about it. I'm not looking to **** with anyone, I just shared it as a cool way.

Imagine trusting Avast and having them sell your private information. Big companies also commit crimes, with your consent . You and I are both victims of companies we fully trust sometime and they take advantage to do their own thing. But , ah , I agree to run Avast, I have bought the license and will let them use my information for anything.

[FrannDzs]

I can remember back in the day when there was a push to get Cobol68 programs converted to Cobol74 back in the late 1980s when the Cobol68 compiler went out of support.

Those languages operated within a few very narrow paradigms, call them "project types," and both the syntax and semantics were very, very close. Yet even so the tools to perform automatic conversions were a disaster.

At the bonehead "line of code at a time" level 90% of "programmers" operate at sure, they could translate over 95% of the source code. But then you had the part left over to do manually... and worse yet all of the hidden flaws in the automatically translated part.

There were very few programs that converted automatically well enough to be worth manual fixup after the fact.

It turned out the the best results required programmers who knew both languages and what the programs were supposed to do. Even with testing to find translation bugs there were problems that slipped through and still turned up for years. It was a long and drawn out process as big as the later "Y2K" problem but without any patience or investment to support it. Management said "just suck it up."

At least with Y2K management could hire "expert" consultants and outsourced coders. That only prolonged the effort and increased the cost, but at least that process paid them in kickbacks and stock options and future sinecure gigs.

VB to VB.Net can be another order of magnitude harder for a lot of reasons. But like those old Cobol programs the originals tend to have been hacked together originally by neophytes and then been patched and patched and patched to fix old bugs and adapt to new requirements. In both cases understanding the programs before trying to convert them can be quite a challenge.

Interesting story. I agree that this is not perfect and you have to have enough knowledge, of course it's not for everyone, but it's better than nothing. We're not talking about 80's software anymore. We are talking about latest generation software. I know it's been a pain to upgrade any project but they deserve a chance. Companies like Nissan and Microsoft have used this product, I imagine they would have found it very useful otherwise they would have rewritten from scratch.
Before you can give an opinion on this one you have to have tried it, otherwise the show could be called talk without knowing. I just hope you find it useful, I like to help people. But if you don't like it I can remove the code.

[ahenry]

Part of Visual Studio 2008 = Copyrighted software, not legal to distribute. There are plenty of legal ways to get it if you want. From what I remember, it worked decently well for very small projects, but not good for anything with a significant GUI. If you are desperate to convert, maybe see about paying the big bucks to the guys at Mobilize dot net. Has anyone gotten a quote from them recently to see what they charge?