Programming Then & Now

[storm5510]

I guess this is as good a place to put my first post as any.

I started programming in 1988 while attending the local community college. Anyone from that time knows there was no Windows, few hard drive, and lots of IBM PC's. I took to it really quick. I guess it was because it was something totally new, different, and had a capability of creating something unique.

The transition from DOS based programming to Windows based was not without issues. It seemed I spent more time designing forms than I did writing code. I managed to learn it all on my own.

It's been over 20 years now since I started. I find myself stuck mostly from changing technology. I still use Visual Basic 6, like many others, from what I've seen here. It's 11 years old. Yet, there has been no decent replacement, in my opinion.

I bought VB.Net 2002 and was totally disappointed. It was just junk to me. I looked again in 2005 and it was a bit better. VB Express 2008 is not bad, except for one thing: Framework. It robbed VB of the ability to make anything that resembled a "stand-alone" program. Yes, it was there in 2002, but I didn't understand the implications at the time.

I guess I stick with Microsoft because it's all I've known since college. I stick with VB 6 because the main run-time, MSVBM60.DLL, has been a part of the Windows OS since 1998. I can't speak for Vista or 7. It wouldn't surprise me if it's missing there. If one does not use any extra controls, then that one run-time is all that is required.

My main issue with Framework is writing a simple little piece of code which would require another used to have install a lot of other modules, megabytes worth, in order to run it. I can't see doing that, so I stick with what I have.

Framework needs to be scrapped, I feel. There was something a while back in the rumor-mill that spoke of VS 2010 not using it, but that turned out to be just a rumor. It will still be there, based on what I read at MSDN.

So, that's it. I plan on doing some reading here to see what others are working on. Perhaps I may put in a word or two from time-to-time.

[mendhak]

Vista, 2008, 2008 R2, 7 onwards include the framework as part of the OS. There isn't as much of a problem as you'd think with using .NET for applications. It's XP and 2K that might be a problem since (someone correct me if I'm wrong) the framework is an optional windows update.

It does depend on your target audience though. If they're unlikely to get .NET, you don't have much incentive to either. If they use .NET enabled OSes though, then you're simply stuck in your old ways and are not comfortable with this change. I welcomed this change with tears in my eyes and a ferret biting my neck - the 'standardization' has helped immensely. Without it, we wouldn't have the awesomeness that is WCF and WF.

[Jenner]

Like you, I'm an old programmer. I started with BASIC on the Commodore 64 and next learned the assembly language needed to really make my computer jump through hoops. I tinkered with FORTRAN and C, but never liked them as programming languages. As time went on, they seemed too primal and far-removed from the higher-order programming required to make even the simplest things happen in the all-new and powerful Windows 3.1.

I quit serious programming for years figuring there would be a time when the tools and languages would catch up with the operating systems. In college, I was introduced to Visual Basic 4 which blew me a way. Sure I tinkered with Borland C++ ant it's ability to make Windows applications, but it was a dinosaur compared to what I saw in Visual Basic. A working, complex Windows application in a day or two of programming? Unheard of!

I stuck with VB till VB6 when the whole .NET thing seemed like it was the end of the line. I was never totally happy with VB6, having hit far too many bugs I had to program around than I was happy with. Sadly, the thing that totally turned me off to .NET was a preconceived notion that ".NET = ASP.NET" and nothing more. That it was VB "for the web". I hated web programming with a passion and thus snubbed it for a few years.

A new job and a new oppurtunity for this Mechanical Engineer to program again, I explored it again. 2005 was right around the corner and everyone seemed to be going on about this .NET Framework 2.0. I had no idea what a framework even was, let alone why I'd want to use it since it was like 80meg at the time.

Then, acquiring a bootleg copy of VS2k5 (no express versions yet!) I started playing around with it at home. A week later, I was instructing our purchasing department to get my business a copy and dishing out $200 to my wife to snag a legit copy for myself from her college's bookstore (love the student discount).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here's my views on the Framework. Windows, is nothing but a "framework". When you're a C++ programmer, to get anything done in Windows, you have to directly call the Win32 API. It's a pain in the rear. VB6 had a "helper" dll that did most of the talking to the Win32 API for you for all the common stuff. It filled in the gaps with bulky, inflexible COM objects.

The .NET Framework is a standardization and I see it as a super-set to the Win32 API. With it, you have native language driven methods to almost EVERYTHING Windows, from simple GDI+ Winform routines to complex DirectX. Because of the Framework, my programs are TINY compared to my VB6 counterparts. Sure the Framework now takes up 250meg, but that's 250meg for EVERTYTHING and it only has to be done ONCE if it wasn't already pre-installed with one of the newer operating systems. Also, in the era of Terabyte drives, 250 meg is a pittance of space.

Simply put, the .NET Framework IS an integral part of modern Windows; not some hacked on DLL. It gets better with each new version. It's fully object oriented in ways the designers of VB6 couldn't even dream of. I never thought I would be doing the kind of complex neural-net style programming using lambdas that I did in my college LISP days in Visual Basic! It's outrageous how advanced Visual Basic is now.

VB6 is simply a child's toy compared to it. It was wonderful in it's day, but far better tools are out there now. ADO is will seem downright primitive when you start learning how much easier, simpler and more powerful ADO.NET is for example.

I recommend giving .NET another shot. Start with VB2k8 Express. Learn the language. The Framework is a non-issue; if the 2.0 Framework isn't a required update from Microsoft for Windows XP, it should be by now. When you start seeing how much you can simply do with object manipulation you'll be astounded. What took you 8 pages of code with complex arrays and embedded loops suddenly becomes three class objects with about half a page of code each.

Programming then and now? Simply put, then was the dark ages compared to now. Just my opinions on the matter.

[abhijit]

I started in 1998 with VB 4.0. I know 6.0 was out, but the firm I was working for didn't want to invest in a licence.

I was excited, when I finally got my hands on VB 6.0. Intellisense was just plain awesome. I dabbled in it a bit and moved to ASP and IIS. This was around 2000. Also moved from file based databases like Access to a more robust MS SQL Server 7.0

I worked for .COM, which went bust. The bright side was I had added Java & a small bit of Unix Scripting to my skills.

The next job I held was for developing applications for a big bank. This was where I was forced to learn and adapt to processes. Estimations played a big part. Something that I had rarely done during the .COM days. First we were asked to estimate and then our project managers committed to those estimates. The estimates became deadlines and that resulted in late nights and a lot of caffeine.

Programming now is a lot more process oriented than it was in the earlier days. In the earlier days, you were given a task and you completed it when you could complete it. Today, you are expected to give an estimate, even before you start on a task. There's a lot more emphasis on documentation, which was not the case earlier. Job security has been tossed out in favor of a process based organization.

[techgnome]

That's because we've finally learned the lessons from consequences of not documenting things. Today's users have just enough knowledge to be dangerous, and often, they don't know what they want until what they see doesn't do what they need. (there's a difference between what users need and what they want and what they ask for).

Documentation and processes have been around since the beginning, it's just changed form over the years.

-tg

[JuggaloBrotha]

It's XP and 2K that might be a problem since (someone correct me if I'm wrong) the framework is an optional windows update.

You're wrong about XP, I noticed 9 months ago that .Net 1.1 up to 3.5 got bumped up to critical updates.

[Shaggy Hiker]

I loved VB6. There were issues, but I could live with them easily enough. I stayed away from .NET until I needed to write for a PDA app, at which time I started into 2003. Now I would never willingly go back. A fully OO, multi-threaded, easy to use, version of VB? Excellent.

I'd write more, but I feel that Jenner pretty well covered my view at least as well as I ever could.

[storm5510]

I really appreciate the replies everyone.

Perhaps I need to take another look. I think there is a later edition of VB 2008 Express. I am pretty sure I saw in on MSDN.

I have an original XP setup package (no service packs) I purchased a long time ago, obviously, at the local Staples store. I keep all the service packs on other CD's. SP3 sort of scares me. I've read mixed reviews. I've been considering a new package with it all combined.

As a part of my college requirements, I had to take some other classes also. Assembly Language, COBOL, and C (no + or ++ back then). Strangely enough, I liked COBOL the best. I found it extremely easy to understand. After college, I taught myself Pascal.

Well, I'm off to hunt that VB 2008 package. I'm on a cable-modem so there is no issue with size.

[JuggaloBrotha]

There are a handful of VS 2008 Editions, but the express ones are the only free ones, for Standard, Pro, Enterprise, Team Suite, Team Suite Foundation Server, etc.. you'll have to shell out some $$

Also, I haven't read anything bad about XP Sp3. I've been running it on all of my XP systems since it was released, not problems whatsoever (it actually fixed a few things instead)

[Shaggy Hiker]

Assembly Language, COBOL, and C (no + or ++ back then).

In C, the ++ operator increments a variable. C++ is a totally new language based on C, but including objects and more. The two languages are still evolving, but C is on its second ANSI standard, and C++ has finally became standardized several years ago.

Strangely enough, I liked COBOL the best. I found it extremely easy to understand.

You are a total FREAK!! I'm so proud of you for admitting that.

By the way, I also have SP3 on three computers with no issues. Two of the computers are used for games, while all three are used for development, so that's a pretty good test.

[storm5510]

...You are a total FREAK!! I'm so proud of you for admitting that...

I had some really pretty classmates. About 20 to be exact. I was the only guy in the class, so I got help, even when I didn't really need it.

=====

Well, I have to say it. I’m impressed! It takes a lot for me to say that. Within about an hour, I had a functioning model of an application I had done in VB6 running in VB2008 Exp. As I went along, I had the one open in VB6 to use as a reference. Some of it I keyed and most I copied and pasted. Bits and pieces, VB2008 didn’t like and pointed it out to me with a jagged underline. Nice feature. I was able to rapidly correct them by replacing instead of typing. These had to do with “caption” versus “text” in labels. In VB6, I never used the “Me” reference. I always wrote it all out. I.e.: “form1.label1.text”. VB2008 calls that “referring to itself” or something similar. As soon as I saw the form identifier underlined, I had a decent idea what the issue was.

There are numerous little things I saw that are great improvements: Text alignment within labels, and guideline alignment of labels to each other on a form, for example. Autosize makes for an extra step, and that’s just fine. There were times I wished I had that feature in the past.

There was one thing in specific that I looked for and did not see: The ability to disable the “X” button on the right side of the toolbar. There are times when I prefer that not be available. I used to disable it in VB6 using some DLL calls and extra code.

My biggest caveat with VB after VB6 was the change in the file system. I had gotten used to Open, Output, Append, and so on. After digging in the MSDN documents and taking some notes, I’ve found the new variants for performing those file operations.

Historically, I’ve been a number-cruncher when it comes to programming. Cryptography has been a favorite for a very long time. Game programming never interested me. Photographic manipulation just a little; photography being one of my other long-time hobbies. Database programming, I never had a need for in a work environment. I realize that is important to a lot of people for many reasons. Inventory, payroll, and taxes, just to name a few. I learned a little SQL though a few years back. I worked for a big company several years ago in their Info/Tech area and had some experience. Downsizing took care of that.

As or SP3, that is included in the new package I am very seriously considering.

[Shaggy Hiker]

I had some really pretty classmates. About 20 to be exact. I was the only guy in the class, so I got help, even when I didn't really need it.

You continue to amaze. I have never heard of a programming class that was 95% female.

[storm5510]

The entire school was like that, except for welding. They had a big nursing program at the time and even larger now. The rest was technology oriented. I enjoyed my time there.

[Jenner]

Yea, some of the schools around the Cleveland area here are like that. Massive pre-med and nursing programs since we have so many medical colleges in the area and of course John Hopkins U.

If you want to see an example of Cryptography, check out my simple cryptography class link in my signature.

[Campion]

There was one thing in specific that I looked for and did not see: The ability to disable the “X” button on the right side of the toolbar. There are times when I prefer that not be available. I used to disable it in VB6 using some DLL calls and extra code.

They've made it pretty easy in .NET.

You change the ControlBox property to False.

So, from left to right you have .MinimizeBox, .MaximizeBox, and .Controlbox.

[JuggaloBrotha]

So, from left to right you have .MinimizeBox, .MaximizeBox, and .Controlbox.

Not quite, the ControlBox is the Panel that all four buttons sit in (Help, Minimize, Maximize, Close)

[Campion]

Not quite, the ControlBox is the Panel that all four buttons sit in (Help, Minimize, Maximize, Close)

I don't have VB in front of me, so I had to rely on Google and MSDN for that. I've messed with Controlbox before, but haven't in a long while. Thanks for the correction.

[storm5510]

I've always looked at that "x" as a panic-abort sort of thing. I don't see it as a proper shutdown for certain processes. As I said, I like heavy number crunching so I prefer everything to stop before I close anything.

[Jenner]

The "X" is simply the "standard user-close method". It should be present on all forms. Of course, interrupting an application while it's doing something important isn't good either; and if Windows is closing down, it's going to kill the application regardless.

That's why we got the Form_Closing event present on all forms. You can look at the "e" argument passed to it, and it'll even tell you why it happens to be closing. You can even completely cancel it's close, perhaps after a save-off of all in-process data or prompt the user.

If it's being closed due to Windows shutdown, then you could perhaps silently save all progress to a temp file and automatically resume it the next time the program is launched.

There are plenty of options.

[storm5510]

I understand what you mean. I never could make those work in VB6; Unload and Terminate. That's past history now, as I don't intend on going back to VB6, unless there is no way around it.

I'll check out what you suggest. Thank you.

[techgnome]

as a side note - the event you were probably needing in VB6 was "QueryUnload" (I know, that's SOOO obviously named)...it happens first, and will give you the reason why the form is closing.... and the chance to cancel the close too. By the time you get to Unload event, it's really too late to do anything about it.

I only mention this incase some one else stumbles on it.

"I don't intend on going back to VB6," << I haven't had VB6 installed in nearly 3 years... not once have I missed it.

-tg

[chris128]

I did a tiny bit of VB6 programming just at home when I was about 16 (and an even smaller bit of C++ when I was about 14 actually) but when I started to get a bit more into programming a couple of years ago I just got Visual Studio 2005 and have used that or 2008 ever since. I guess cos I spent so little time with VB6 I didnt really appreciate the difference but now that I am quite comfortable with basic .NET stuff it seems awful trying to do the odd thing in VB6.
Like others have said, Vista already contains the .NET framework, although annoyingly its version 3.0 not 3.5, so any apps that target .NET 2.0 will run on Vista with no prerequisite installs etc. Windows 7 I assume will contain .NET 3.5, so again that will be a pain when we all start using .NET 4.0 but oh well, its better than no framework

[JuggaloBrotha]

I did a tiny bit of VB6 programming just at home when I was about 16 (and an even smaller bit of C++ when I was about 14 actually) but when I started to get a bit more into programming a couple of years ago I just got Visual Studio 2005 and have used that or 2008 ever since. I guess cos I spent so little time with VB6 I didnt really appreciate the difference but now that I am quite comfortable with basic .NET stuff it seems awful trying to do the odd thing in VB6.
Like others have said, Vista already contains the .NET framework, although annoyingly its version 3.0 not 3.5, so any apps that target .NET 2.0 will run on Vista with no prerequisite installs etc. Windows 7 I assume will contain .NET 3.5, so again that will be a pain when we all start using .NET 4.0 but oh well, its better than no framework

Vista shipping w/ only up to the 3.0 Framework is only a pain if you use stuff in the 3.5 Framework. I haven't seen the need to use stuff in the 3.0 Framework, let alone the 3.5 Framework yet.

Although Win7 shipping with the 4.0 Framework is more of a big deal to me cause there's things in the 4.0 Framework that'll make a huge amount of my work easier so I'll be moving to that, I just hope that the VS 2010 IDE is fixed up by the time it's RTM.

[Jenner]

...cause there's things in the 4.0 Framework that'll make a huge amount of my work easier so I'll be moving to that

I'm curious what things you're looking at in 4.0 because so far, I'm pretty unimpressed with the changes I've heard about. I'm probably missing some things though. Currently, the only new feature that I'm impressed with is you no longer have to append lines with "_".

Consequently, the addition of LINQ in 3.5 was huge for me and I use it all the time now.

[techgnome]

"the only new feature that I'm impressed with is you no longer have to append lines with "_"." << and that's a LANGUAGE change... not a framework change. So you'll be able to skip the line continuation in VB no matter which FW you are targeting. Also, note, it only works IF IT IS OBVIOUS that the line continues.....

In otehrwords, this works:

Dim myString As String = "This is a line" &
       "This is also a line" &
       "And so is this"

But this won't:

Dim myString As String = "This is a line" 
       "This is also a line" 
       "And so is this"

a trite example, I know, but gets the point across.

-tg

[chris128]

Vista shipping w/ only up to the 3.0 Framework is only a pain if you use stuff in the 3.5 Framework. I haven't seen the need to use stuff in the 3.0 Framework, let alone the 3.5 Framework yet.

Although Win7 shipping with the 4.0 Framework is more of a big deal to me cause there's things in the 4.0 Framework that'll make a huge amount of my work easier so I'll be moving to that, I just hope that the VS 2010 IDE is fixed up by the time it's RTM.

Huh? .NET 3.5 includes WPF, WCF and WF which are all HUGE extensions onto the framework, as well as LINQ as Jenner pointed out and several other things. I would say the jump from 2.0 to 3/3.5 provides an awful lot more than the jump from 3.5 to 4.0. I wouldnt be surprised if most of these things that you think will make your work so much easier are actually mostly already in 3.5 because like Jenner I dont see that much amazing new stuff in 4.0 - its more just polishing what is already there in 3.5 as far as I can see.

[storm5510]

I always used Option Explicit in VB6. I kept my declarations ordered by type for readability. I can't say as I care for declare and assign in one line, except for constants. What was done above sort of looks like that except for the use of "Dim".

Can someone explain the acronyms just above all beginning with the letter W?

Here something I need to ask about: The dialogs for opening and saving files. VB6 had "CancelError". I don't see that now. Having a crash just because I click "Cancel" doesn't work for me. Anyone?

[chris128]

WPF = Windows Presentation Foundation, a new platform that allows you to create nicer looking applications basically. See my post in this thread for a slightly longer description: http://www.vbforums.com/showthread.php?t=570937

WCF = Windows Communication Foundation, a communication platform that makes it easy to communicate between programs in managed code (in other words no sending bytes etc, you just call methods in your server program from your client or vice versa)

WF = Windows Workflow Foundation (dont ask me why it isnt WWF...), a new way of developing programs using a visual workflow rather than just writing lines of code as you would normally. I havent played with it much so cant really explain it that well.

EDIT: Oh and as for the open/save dialogs, you can just test the DialogResult property like so:

If SomeSaveFileDialog.ShowDialog = Windows.Forms.DialogResult.OK Then
            MessageBox.Show("The user clicked OK!")
End If

[Shaggy Hiker]

The item that intrigues me in 4.0 is the greater support for multicore processors. Being able to split loops into multiple threads easily could provide for some interesting performance boosts.

[JuggaloBrotha]

I'm curious what things you're looking at in 4.0 because so far, I'm pretty unimpressed with the changes I've heard about. I'm probably missing some things though. Currently, the only new feature that I'm impressed with is you no longer have to append lines with "_".

Consequently, the addition of LINQ in 3.5 was huge for me and I use it all the time now.

I am looking forward to that, but that's a compile time thing not a framework thing, just like I use the If(Condition, Output1, Output2) thing in VS 2008 all the time, but the project still only needs the 2.0 Framework cause that If() choice is a language thing, not a framework thing. I'm looking forward to the Parallel processing loops in the 4.0 Framework. IE: Parallel.ForEach(arr, Function(ip) WriteLine(ip))

Huh? .NET 3.5 includes WPF, WCF and WF which are all HUGE extensions onto the framework, as well as LINQ as Jenner pointed out and several other things. I would say the jump from 2.0 to 3/3.5 provides an awful lot more than the jump from 3.5 to 4.0. I wouldnt be surprised if most of these things that you think will make your work so much easier are actually mostly already in 3.5 because like Jenner I dont see that much amazing new stuff in 4.0 - its more just polishing what is already there in 3.5 as far as I can see.

Which is all fun and dandy but I haven't had a new project come in where I can make it in WPF or utilize WCF so if they were in the 2.0 Framework I'd use it, but the projects started in 2005 to 2006 and I can only build on what's already there, this rules out Linq also.

However, with the parallel processing we can start upping the project's frameworks to at least utilize that and of course when new forms need to be built, we can look into making them in WPF instead of standard WinForms, however the likely hood of new forms being built are slim to none.

I always used Option Explicit in VB6. I kept my declarations ordered by type for readability. I can't say as I care for declare and assign in one line, except for constants. What was done above sort of looks like that except for the use of "Dim".

Can someone explain the acronyms just above all beginning with the letter W?

Here something I need to ask about: The dialogs for opening and saving files. VB6 had "CancelError". I don't see that now. Having a crash just because I click "Cancel" doesn't work for me. Anyone?

WPF = Window Presentation Foundation, it's where you design a UI using XAML tags (very, very similar to HTML tags)
WCF = Windows Communication Foundation, it's where you do your networking and other remote communication stuff in your app(s).
I forget right off hand what WF stands for.
WWF = Windows Workflow Foundation, which is used to have the IDE auto generate large portions of code for you based on the "flow" of the data. At least that's what I remember reading about years ago when Vista came out and the 3.0 Framework was all the rage (it's the 3.0 Framework that was rushed so Vista could use it in the apps that ship with the OS, otherwise the 4 pillars would have just been released with the rest of the 3.5 Framework)

The Dialogs in .Net return a Windows.Forms.DialogResult enum value so you check for the <> DialogResult.Cancel as in:

Dim ofd as New OpenFileDialog
If ofd.ShowDialog(Me) <> Windows.Forms.DialogResult.Cancel Then
  'User did NOT cancel so continue with it
Else
  'User CANCELED, slap them or something ;)
End If

[storm5510]

The item that intrigues me in 4.0 is the greater support for multicore processors. Being able to split loops into multiple threads easily could provide for some interesting performance boosts.

I've been doing 3D modeling for nearly ten years, as a hobby. One of the guys in that forum group has a dual Quad-Core Xeon setup, (eight cores total). I will admit that is a bit extreme, but having affinity to split processes among cores seems a given at this point in time. I have a dual-core CPU. Most things don't use all of that. I can tell by watching the core temperatures. The second core runs a lot cooler than the first.

Thank for the info on the file system.

[storm5510]

dim fName as String

If fName = vbNullString Then
    saveDialog.ShowDialog()
    If saveDialog.ShowDialog() = Windows.Forms.DialogResult.Cancel Then
          Exit Sub
    Else
          fName = saveDialog.FileName
    End If
End If

datafile = My.Computer.FileSystem.OpenTextFileWriter(fName, True)

This works but there is an issue. I get repeated instances of the save dialog. In other words, twice.

I may try debug "step-into" to see exactly what line triggers the second instance.

[techgnome]

WWF and WF are the same thing... for what ever reason in the last year or so, MS dropped the Windows "W" off of it, calling it just Workflow. Workflow is really neat. Got to use some of it along with WCF in a project last year... Almost litteraly programing usi9ng flowcharts. The state machine process we built was one of the coolest things I'd ever done.

-tg

[storm5510]

Flowcharts. Those have been around for ages. I took a flowchart class in college. Glad to see they are still used.

Oh, I just remembered something. It was about the COBOL class I took. We used dumb terminals started on a floppy. They were linked to an IBM System 36, I believe it was. A set of earplugs would have been nice.

The keyboard layout was horrible. "/" was used for Enter. There were others I cannot remember now.

[penagate]

dim fName as String

If fName = vbNullString Then
    saveDialog.ShowDialog()
    If saveDialog.ShowDialog() = Windows.Forms.DialogResult.Cancel Then
          Exit Sub
    Else
          fName = saveDialog.FileName
    End If
End If

datafile = My.Computer.FileSystem.OpenTextFileWriter(fName, True)

This works but there is an issue. I get repeated instances of the save dialog. In other words, twice.

I may try debug "step-into" to see exactly what line triggers the second instance.

I've highlighted the two calls to ShowDialog. You may be thinking that the second line is only checking the result when in fact it is showing the dialog again and then checking that result. Removing the first highlighted line should solve your problem.

[storm5510]

On a suggestion, I looked at an example in the MSDN documentation. I should do that before asking here. What I ended up with does not much resemble the above. It works though.

Thanks.

[chris128]

WPF = Window Presentation Foundation, it's where you design a UI using XAML tags (very, very similar to HTML tags)

lol its a lot more than just that... as I explained in my post which is a couple of posts before yours

[Jenner]

Oh yea... the multi-core loop thing; i.e. "Parallel.For .. Next" I think it was. I read about that and it does intrigue me. I don't know exactly where I'd utilize it though in my code. I can't think of too many large processing loops in our various software packages it would be useful in. I've been using LINQ, lambdas and delegates to process whole collections at once. It's single thread processing though, so I can definitely see the appeal... (ooohhh... multi-core LINQ processing would so rock.)

What I want to see are more fully fleshed out WPF base controls; or at least a set of transitional controls that have more of the features of their WinForm equivalents to make that rift a little less wide.

[chris128]

What I want to see are more fully fleshed out WPF base controls; or at least a set of transitional controls that have more of the features of their WinForm equivalents to make that rift a little less wide.

Whilst that would be good to at least attract people from winforms and slightly ease the transition, I dont think its really necessary. Basically everyone that tries WPF hates it for the first few days because it looks like winforms, it does pretty much the same job as winforms, but they cant program it like winforms. Changing WPF to be more like winforms is just taking steps backwards if you ask me but I do appreciate you are not saying lets change anything big, you are just suggesting that the controls have more of the properties and methods that people are used to. Once you get used to WPF there are not many situations where you wish you had the equivalent winforms control... or maybe thats just me because I dont make any really large programs, I dunno.

[JuggaloBrotha]

dim fName as String

If fName = vbNullString Then
    saveDialog.ShowDialog()
    If saveDialog.ShowDialog() = Windows.Forms.DialogResult.Cancel Then
          Exit Sub
    Else
          fName = saveDialog.FileName
    End If
End If

datafile = My.Computer.FileSystem.OpenTextFileWriter(fName, True)

This works but there is an issue. I get repeated instances of the save dialog. In other words, twice.

I may try debug "step-into" to see exactly what line triggers the second instance.

I would change this code around a little bit to make it easier to read:

If fName = String.Empty Then
    If saveDialog.ShowDialog() <> Windows.Forms.DialogResult.Cancel Then
          fName = saveDialog.FileName
    End If
End If

lol its a lot more than just that... as I explained in my post which is a couple of posts before yours

I saw that after my post (you posted it as I was typing my long one up and I didnt feel like going back and editing mine after I got yours) I also kept my description really simple because at first glance, that's what it looks like and in reality that's basically what it is, XAML is a cross between HTML and XML with some additional enhancements, but with the visual designer you really don't need to know those difference at first and ya learn em as ya go

Oh yea... the multi-core loop thing; i.e. "Parallel.For .. Next" I think it was. I read about that and it does intrigue me. I don't know exactly where I'd utilize it though in my code. I can't think of too many large processing loops in our various software packages it would be useful in. I've been using LINQ, lambdas and delegates to process whole collections at once. It's single thread processing though, so I can definitely see the appeal... (ooohhh... multi-core LINQ processing would so rock.)

I've seen quite a few parallel linq examples, I do believe it exists

Whilst that would be good to at least attract people from winforms and slightly ease the transition, I dont think its really necessary. Basically everyone that tries WPF hates it for the first few days because it looks like winforms, it does pretty much the same job as winforms, but they cant program it like winforms. Changing WPF to be more like winforms is just taking steps backwards if you ask me but I do appreciate you are not saying lets change anything big, you are just suggesting that the controls have more of the properties and methods that people are used to. Once you get used to WPF there are not many situations where you wish you had the equivalent winforms control... or maybe thats just me because I dont make any really large programs, I dunno.

I think WPF should remain focused on bridging the gap between winforms, webforms and mobileforms, and not be geared more towards any one of them