What if there was a NEW vb6

[Niya]

....who have extremely specific use-cases.

What do you mean by this ? Both VB6, VB.Net/C# can be used to author a wide range of applications.

[Tanner_H]

What do you mean by this ? Both VB6, VB.Net/C# can be used to author a wide range of applications.

Sorry, I didn't say that very well. The point I was trying to make was: there are very few circumstances where VB6 - or VB.Net - is the *best* tool for the job.

In my personal opinion, aside from existing VB projects, C# is always preferable to VB.Net. There's a much larger development community, more code samples, and the syntax is similar to enough to other C-based languages that porting code from other languages is generally easier. It also gains new features first, and from a job-security standpoint, there are way more positions for C# developers. So unless you're already a VB.Net developer, there's not much point to learning and/or using it.

VB6 is the same way, only 1000x stronger on all points.

IMO, VB6 and VB.Net users should be united against anti-BASIC forces, instead of constantly fighting among themselves. VB6 users don't gain anything from the death of VB.Net (except maybe schadenfreude?) and VB.Net users don't gain anything from the death of VB6.

I do, however, think it would be unfortunate to live in a world where BASIC doesn't exist. Since Microsoft is the primary force behind serious BASIC implementations, and BASIC has a crucial place in Microsoft history, I would like to see their version of BASIC - whatever it is - remain viable.

That may be a pipe dream, however.

[Niya]

Sorry, I didn't say that very well. The point I was trying to make was: there are very few circumstances where VB6 - or VB.Net - is the *best* tool for the job.

In my personal opinion, aside from existing VB projects, C# is always preferable to VB.Net. There's a much larger development community, more code samples, and the syntax is similar to enough to other C-based languages that porting code from other languages is generally easier. It also gains new features first, and from a job-security standpoint, there are way more positions for C# developers. So unless you're already a VB.Net developer, there's not much point to learning and/or using it.

VB6 is the same way, only 1000x stronger on all points.

IMO, VB6 and VB.Net users should be united against anti-BASIC forces, instead of constantly fighting among themselves. VB6 users don't gain anything from the death of VB.Net (except maybe schadenfreude?) and VB.Net users don't gain anything from the death of VB6.

I do, however, think it would be unfortunate to live in a world where BASIC doesn't exist. Since Microsoft is the primary force behind serious BASIC implementations, and BASIC has a crucial place in Microsoft history, I would like to see their version of BASIC - whatever it is - remain viable.

That may be a pipe dream, however.

Ah...I see. Makes sense. Although I'm not too disturbed about C# over taking VB.Net. As I said, the main improvements in my opinion is not the language itself but the IDE and the .Net Framework. I prefer writing VB code over C# code because I'm accustomed to VB code but any argument for or against VB.Net also applies to C#, except for arguments about syntax. C# is a really beautiful language, VB(both 6 and .Net) is very crude and clunky in comparison.