C++ VS Visual Basic?

[penagate]

How about a good programmer vs a poor programmers - I bet that makes the biggest difference.

I think that sums it up.

A good programmer in any language (well OK most) will beat a poor programmer of a fast language like C++ or ASM.

But a good programmer in C++ will beat a good programmer in VB (if only by an unnoticable difference). I think that was the point of the thread originally (the speed difference part anyway).

[Merri]

And a last addition: for the good VB programmer it takes less time to do the same what it takes for the C++ programmer. So, VB programmer likely beats the C++ in the time taken to make the code, but the end result by C++ coder is faster.

Had to say those things so they won't be totally forgotten

[msdev]

I totally disagree tht VB is far much better than vb
Of course Vb made things simpler but it is simple language used by basic
i think that noone above who have comment has an idea of master functions of c++
in vb Msgbox code..etc are implemeted but in CPP 2 % of the program are reserved and else we create for eg in c++ Cout works when we as iostream.h file whic creates the code cout we can even edit that

Vb does not provide graphic accerlation while c++ does that why games are build in it

cPP is difficult but it will take less time to learn all functions of c++ than vb

c++ can build Os while vb not it wrks because net framewrk plugin else it has no power

VB not compatible with other os while CPP does

I think if anybody says that VB is better than CPP than I think that he is just a begginer developer making just DOS programs in CPP

[Joacim Andersson]

First of all, this thread is over 6 years old. I don't understand why you had to wake it up after all this time.

I totally disagree tht VB is far much better than vb

That didn't make sense, but I guess that you disagree that VB is better than C++.

Of course Vb made things simpler but it is simple language used by basic
i think that noone above who have comment has an idea of master functions of c++

Well, if you've actually read the whole thread then you would know that you're wrong in this assumption. Just read my first reply again.

in vb Msgbox code..etc are implemeted but in CPP 2 % of the program are reserved and else we create for eg in c++ Cout works when we as iostream.h file whic creates the code cout we can even edit that

So what? MsgBox is not a reserved word in VB. I agree that VB has many more reserved words compared to C++ but that by itself doesn't make it a better or worse language.

Vb does not provide graphic accerlation while c++ does that why games are build in it

That's not correct. Today graphic acceleration are built into both the hardware as well as as software in the OS or via other platforms such as DirectX. Many games that come out today, depending on the platform, use various frameworks for the graphics and you can easily build high-end games for the X-Box or Windows (PC) using XNA and VB today.

The rest of your arguments is just nonsens if you want to compare the benifits of the two languages. "You can build operating systems in C++". Alright so what? How many developers in the world are building new operating systems?

The fact that you can use C++ on other platforms besides Windows is also besides the point. You can still not take your C++ source that you've used to create a Windows application and compile that on a different OS. You use the OS specific API when you do development to create the best experience on that specific platform. So saying that a language is better just because you can use it on different platforms doesn't make it better per sa. There are Basic languages (do a Google search for REALBasic) that are multitargetet as well, and you have Java that also claimes to be a multitarget language so if you want to develop for more than one platform you can use one of those, but you always have to make trade-offs if you pick one of those "write once - run anyware" approaches.

I'm not saying that VB is better than C++, but I'm also not saying that C++ is better than VB. That kind of comparison is just ridiculous simply because it depends on what you're doing. Is a hammer better than an saw? Yes it is! But only if you want to get a nail into a piece of wood but not if you want to split the same piece of wood, because then the saw will do a much better job.

To do an honest comparison of the languages you need to consider what it is that you need to do and in which language you will be most productive. So to get back to your argument about operating systems, I agree that I wouldn't pick VB if I ever needed to create a new OS. But then again I've never been paid to create a new OS and I doubt very much anyone will ever hire me to do so. My customers, that ultimatly pay me, are usually not interested in the tools I use but how fast they will get a return on their investment and since I can honestly say that I'm far more productive in VB compared to C++, VB will be my choice of language. But I'm not using VB alone, I use a bunch of tools and different technologies to get the job done.

I think if anybody says that VB is better than CPP than I think that he is just a begginer developer making just DOS programs in CPP

I think that anyone that claims that C++ is better for everything is not living in the real world, developing real solutions to real people. Or to put it in other words: Is not a real developer. There are many programmers out there and a few of them are also developers.

[Jenner]

Vb does not provide graphic accerlation while c++ does that why games are build in it

VB's been able to do this natively for a while now via .NET 3.0's inclusion of WPF but you can do graphic acceleration in any language you can call libraries with. I use hardware accelerated routines all the time in VB. Heck, I can do DirectX in Fortran if I wanted to. That's not the reason large-studio game developers use C++. They use C++ because it compiles tightly to native machine code; thus reducing the amount of processing layers required to run. They do this, at the cost of a managed code environment, which while safer and easier to program for, is slower.

cPP is difficult but it will take less time to learn all functions of c++ than vb

Not quite true if all you're talking about are core functions. VB doesn't have a lot of core functions. Neither does C++. Both language rely on the inclusion of libraries to do anything complex. In C++, you have to include math.c just like you have to call System.Math in VB.

c++ can build Os while vb not it wrks because net framewrk plugin else it has no power

That's just environment. You can just as well argue that programming a computer using nothing but 1's and 0's is better because you can always use it... but for C++, you need an operating system and a compiler. It really has nothing to do with the language.

VB not compatible with other os while CPP does

A language is only as good as you have libraries and a compiler for it. You're not going to see too many C++ programs that use C++ Direct3D libraries run natively on Linux. Same with Frameworks. There's plans for a .NET Framework that runs on ARM Processors in the very near future and .NET works on XBOX360 as well. There are also Mac/Linux versions of the .NET Framework called Mono.

EDIT: Cripes... I should have seen this was a necrothread before I hit the "reply" button...

[Atheist]

msdev, you are resurrecting a pretty old thread!

I totally disagree tht VB is far much better than vb
Of course Vb made things simpler but it is simple language used by basic
i think that noone above who have comment has an idea of master functions of c++

I agree that VB is not better than C++ but at the same time I do not agree that C++ is better than VB. It all boils down to the right tool for the right job and all that.
You mention master functions of C++...i have never heard anyone say that before, could you elaborate?

Vb does not provide graphic accerlation while c++ does that why games are build in it

You are talking about languages and graphics acceleration, which makes no sense. It is true that games are usually written in C++ but not because the language itself provides some sort of acceleration when it comes to graphics. The graphics API (Direct3D, OpenGL..) provides access to the graphics hardware. Neither Direct3D nor OpenGL is in any way tied to C++, and can be used with VB.

cPP is difficult but it will take less time to learn all functions of c++ than vb

Please elaborate on this. This makes no sense. C++ in itself is minimalistic, but I take it you are referring to the standard template library which is not by any means simple.
How easy something is is entirely subjective.
On the other hand, does one really need to learn all classes and methods of an entire framework? A good developer doesnt keep everything in his head, a good developer knows how to find what he is looking for.
[/QUOTE]

c++ can build Os while vb not it wrks because net framewrk plugin else it has no power

VB not compatible with other os while CPP does

C++ is not dependency free, it requires a runtime. Fortunately this runtime is available on most platforms. This is what makes it cross-platform. However you have the Mono project for running .NET applications on linux. Theoretically, it is possible to write an OS in the .NET framework and I believe there are projects dedicated to it. Google and you will find it.

I think if anybody says that VB is better than CPP than I think that he is just a begginer developer making just DOS programs in CPP

I think you are a bit harsh in this statement and based on what you have written in your post, I could question your knowledge in the area, but I wont, because I'm nice like that .

[CVMichael]

LOL, poor msdev, I guess he touched one of our sensitive spots

just lock the thread, because I think disscussions like this will never end.

[Hack]

I agree, and have closed the thread.

However, I would like to permit msdev to respond to the comments related to his post should he so desire.

@msdev: If you would like the opportunity to respond please send me a PM, and I will unlock this thread so that you may do so.