View Poll Results: Still using VB6 or VB.NET
- Voters
- 24. You may not vote on this poll
-
Jan 25th, 2004, 08:50 AM
#1
Thread Starter
Frenzied Member
Still using VB6 or VB.NET
I know polls come and go, but just to see how the developers are currently going about with their programming environment, which do you use?
I know i personally am trying to get my head around VB.NET but all the code changes and control changes make it just that little bit harder.
I use Microsoft Visual Basic 2005. (Therefore, most code samples I provide will be based around the .NET Framework v2.0, unless otherwise specified)
-
Jan 25th, 2004, 10:48 AM
#2
I see no poll option for "VB sucks, I moved to a better language"

I like C# alot more than VB, VB actually pisses me off.
-
Jan 25th, 2004, 12:32 PM
#3
When .NET came I got angry and moved over to C++, only using VB now for small tasks or to help out people on this forum....
-
Jan 25th, 2004, 06:51 PM
#4
Thread Starter
Frenzied Member
Hmmm, makes ya think. We are all gonna have to move sooner or later I spose, pitty it's such a long road to do it.
I use Microsoft Visual Basic 2005. (Therefore, most code samples I provide will be based around the .NET Framework v2.0, unless otherwise specified)
-
Jan 25th, 2004, 06:53 PM
#5
I have never tried very hard to move over to VB.Net but as long as so much of the code has been altered then it is more or less just as easy to move to an other language then to move to VB.Net..
-
Jan 29th, 2004, 01:37 PM
#6
Hyperactive Member
-
Jan 29th, 2004, 01:38 PM
#7
Originally posted by mastermind94
what is C# exactly?
A language
-
Jan 29th, 2004, 01:52 PM
#8
Supreme User
I thought C# was just to distinguish between C+ and C++. So C(Number). How do you pronounce C++ anyway, like:
C Plus Plus?
-
Jan 29th, 2004, 01:56 PM
#9
Originally posted by Madboy
I thought C# was just to distinguish between C+ and C++. So C(Number). How do you pronounce C++ anyway, like:
C Plus Plus?
There is no such thing as C+. Microsoft made the C# language, ask them. C++ is pronounced as you said it.
-
Jan 29th, 2004, 02:00 PM
#10
Supreme User
Im sure ive heard of C+, or is C# pronounced as:
C
-
Jan 29th, 2004, 02:41 PM
#11
Originally posted by Madboy
Im sure ive heard of C+, or is C# pronounced as:
C
C# is pronounced as it is written, C-Sharp
C != C#
-
Jan 29th, 2004, 05:27 PM
#12
So Unbanned
The more languages you know the easier it is to learn another.
Atleast for me.
-
Jan 30th, 2004, 12:30 AM
#13
Still using VB6, moving to .NET
Can't I vote for two? :9
-
Jan 31st, 2004, 10:14 AM
#14
I wonder how many charact
Originally posted by kasracer
I see no poll option for "VB sucks, I moved to a better language"

I like C# alot more than VB, VB actually pisses me off.
That's a grossly opinionated statement, considering VB and C# share the same framework.
Unless you got frustrated writing hardware drivers (which you wouldn't use C# for anyway), there's no real frustration between the two.
Any solid .Net programmer would know how to use both.
-
Jan 31st, 2004, 01:05 PM
#15
The syntax is different. Personally, I can't stand Basic syntax.
All the buzzt
 CornedBee
"Writing specifications is like writing a novel. Writing code is like writing poetry."
- Anonymous, published by Raymond Chen
Don't PM me with your problems, I scan most of the forums daily. If you do PM me, I will not answer your question.
-
Jan 31st, 2004, 05:36 PM
#16
Originally posted by nemaroller
That's a grossly opinionated statement
Du'h
Originally posted by nemaroller
considering VB and C# share the same framework.
I don't see how this would have any relavence in your arguement (whatever the hell it may be).
Originally posted by nemaroller
Unless you got frustrated writing hardware drivers (which you wouldn't use C# for anyway), there's no real frustration between the two.
What idiot would write drivers with a .NET language? Honestly now....
There is quite a large difference between the 2 languages and, according to alot of benchmarks, C# executes much quicker in many different aspects and is usually twice as fast, or faster than VB.NET in IO functions.
Originally posted by nemaroller
Any solid .Net programmer would know how to use both.
Probably.
As CornedBee said, I cannot stand basic syntax.
-
Jan 31st, 2004, 05:50 PM
#17
Supreme User
whats wrong with BASIC syntax? Its like plain english compare to C++
-
Feb 1st, 2004, 05:36 AM
#18
Yeah, plain English is unfortunatly unsuited for programming.
All the buzzt
 CornedBee
"Writing specifications is like writing a novel. Writing code is like writing poetry."
- Anonymous, published by Raymond Chen
Don't PM me with your problems, I scan most of the forums daily. If you do PM me, I will not answer your question.
-
Feb 1st, 2004, 05:38 AM
#19
Supreme User
But isnt it less of a chore to the programmer as he/she can read it? (but then again you should be able to read it if you coded it )
-
Feb 1st, 2004, 05:41 AM
#20
No, C-like syntax is far more precise, once you get used to it.
All the buzzt
 CornedBee
"Writing specifications is like writing a novel. Writing code is like writing poetry."
- Anonymous, published by Raymond Chen
Don't PM me with your problems, I scan most of the forums daily. If you do PM me, I will not answer your question.
-
Feb 1st, 2004, 05:43 AM
#21
-
Feb 1st, 2004, 05:54 AM
#22
All the buzzt
 CornedBee
"Writing specifications is like writing a novel. Writing code is like writing poetry."
- Anonymous, published by Raymond Chen
Don't PM me with your problems, I scan most of the forums daily. If you do PM me, I will not answer your question.
-
Feb 1st, 2004, 08:46 AM
#23
I wonder how many charact
I use both, and I while C# (JAVA) syntax is smaller and appears tighter, the differences between the two are trivial.
I think its truly a matter of opinion.
Try{
}
vs.
Try
End Try
And C# isn't faster in IO functions. I know there was a thread in here where we discussed this using a certain piece of code, and Edneesis had trimmed it from 4x faster in C# to 2x faster in C#.
But one block of code doesn't make a valid case. In fact, I'd be willing that code was run with Integer array bounds enforced in VB, which slowed it down.
-
Feb 1st, 2004, 12:33 PM
#24
-
Feb 1st, 2004, 12:59 PM
#25
Originally posted by nemaroller
And C# isn't faster in IO functions.
Actually, it is. There are many different benchmarks for this proving it is true, not just that one thread. There was also an article about C#'s speed versus VB.NET's speed on the MSDN, good luck finding it though (Microsoft has made THE worst search engine for the MSDN).
-
Feb 3rd, 2004, 08:06 PM
#26
Junior Member
-
Feb 3rd, 2004, 08:15 PM
#27
Get a book...and/or start to read CornedBees tutorials..
-
Feb 3rd, 2004, 08:42 PM
#28
I wonder how many charact
Originally posted by kasracer
Actually, it is. There are many different benchmarks for this proving it is true, not just that one thread. There was also an article about C#'s speed versus VB.NET's speed on the MSDN, good luck finding it though (Microsoft has made THE worst search engine for the MSDN).
I haven't seen any articles on the differences between IO functions. The ones I have seen are comparing C# using the framework IO functions against VB using the VisualBasic.Compatibility file functions (related to the VB6 friendly (VisualBasic Namespace commands), instead of VB with the framework IO functions... and they conclude by saying, use the .Net IO functions (well duh).
VB does suffer from 'over-boxing', but option strict enforcement and just good programming reduces it (although it may be far too easy to accidently do in VB), and the bottom line here is the Whidbey release (w. next .Net framework version) will attend to the poorer reflection performance in VB.
Like the thread in this forum, Edneesis stated that the VB test was run with Integer overflow checking on, which may have attributed to the results.
And, supposedly, edit-and-continue functionality will appear in the next IDE... along with pointers in the next framework v. Until then, people that care that much, can implement marshalling:
http://www.dotnetbips.com/displayarticle.aspx?id=229
Last edited by nemaroller; Feb 3rd, 2004 at 09:54 PM.
-
Feb 3rd, 2004, 08:52 PM
#29
Originally posted by nemaroller
Like the thread in this forum, Edneesis stated that the VB test was run with Integer overflow checking on, which may have attributed to the results.
If you are using VB and you are not making databases you should never use Integers anyway...
-
Feb 3rd, 2004, 09:05 PM
#30
I wonder how many charact
Well, I'm still out on that.
With 64Bit processors on the way, Integer may in a few years map to a 64bit type and be the best format for a 64bit processor. If I explicity declare any integer as int32, then what performace problems may that cause?
Definitely for working with the API, declaring int32 is imperative. But for the majority of my work (databases), or even using integers as iterators, I'm still using Dim X As Integer (vs Dim X as Int32).
If you have any additional insights, I'd love to hear em.
-
Feb 3rd, 2004, 09:09 PM
#31
Originally posted by nemaroller
Well, I'm still out on that.
With 64Bit processors on the way, Integer may in a few years map to a 64bit type and be the best format for a 64bit processor. If I explicity declare any integer as int32, then what performace problems may that cause?
Definitely for working with the API, declaring int32 is imperative. But for the majority of my work (databases), or even using integers as iterators, I'm still using Dim X As Integer (vs Dim X as Int32).
If you have any additional insights, I'd love to hear em.
I am talking about VB4-6 not .NET....where Long should be used in stead of Integer. And when 64 bit prosessors takes over the market there will probably be optimised compilers for that too...
-
Feb 3rd, 2004, 09:27 PM
#32
Hyperactive Member
what about Delphi
-
Feb 3rd, 2004, 09:35 PM
#33
I wonder how many charact
Originally posted by NoteMe
I am talking about VB4-6 not .NET....where Long should be used in stead of Integer. And when 64 bit prosessors takes over the market there will probably be optimised compilers for that too...
Oh.. Well, the test code I was referring to was written in .Net.
-
Feb 4th, 2004, 03:21 AM
#34
As long as the variable is 32bits long, it's faster then the original 16bit integer in VB6....
-
Feb 4th, 2004, 05:32 AM
#35
The Athlon64, at least, shouldn't have any noticeable speed disadvantages for 32-bit integers vs. 64-bit integers - but I might soon be able to test this
All the buzzt
 CornedBee
"Writing specifications is like writing a novel. Writing code is like writing poetry."
- Anonymous, published by Raymond Chen
Don't PM me with your problems, I scan most of the forums daily. If you do PM me, I will not answer your question.
-
Feb 4th, 2004, 07:10 AM
#36
I'm currently torn between VB and VB.net.
VB6 is better for writing quick programs whereas it takes me about 3 times as long in .net. but VB.net is so much more versatile than vb6.
Plus, IMO drawing operations were so much easier to understand in vb6.
It was perfect so they went and improved it
I don't live here any more.
-
Feb 4th, 2004, 08:21 AM
#37
Originally posted by CornedBee
The Athlon64, at least, shouldn't have any noticeable speed disadvantages for 32-bit integers vs. 64-bit integers - but I might soon be able to test this
I have heard that it is actually a bit faster on 32bit integers too..Not that I understand why....
BTW can you buy one for me too...
-
Feb 4th, 2004, 08:34 AM
#38
Mine's already lying around in my room, but the mobo hasn't arrived yet.
All the buzzt
 CornedBee
"Writing specifications is like writing a novel. Writing code is like writing poetry."
- Anonymous, published by Raymond Chen
Don't PM me with your problems, I scan most of the forums daily. If you do PM me, I will not answer your question.
-
Feb 4th, 2004, 10:07 AM
#39
I am soo jalous of your new girl CornedBee. Even if I don't need a faster PC for what I am using it for at the moment. But it always nice to have a new girl tight girl. What MB and CPU have you bougt? How fast? And what RAM?
-
Feb 4th, 2004, 11:31 AM
#40
Sleep mode
I was programming in VB6 for about 3 years .
Moved to VB.NET for 2 years now .
Moved to C#.NET for about 6 months now .
I hate both VB & VB.NET . Both suck , both stupid . C# synatx is really lovely and I agree it's more precise like C/C++ .
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
Click Here to Expand Forum to Full Width
|