|
When C# happened to me, I still preferred VB6. 
modified 31-Mar-14 20:35pm.
|
|
|
|
|
d@nish wrote: No. It is not. Just kidding.
You must be VB programmer! April Fool's day isn't until tomorrow.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
I am a VB6 programmer and I hate when people do not make the difference between VB6 programmers and other VB programmers. What it is so funny regarding this post ?! care to explain ?!
|
|
|
|
|
ISpliter wrote: What it is so funny regarding this post ?! care to explain ?!
People in the past have made "VB[x] is the best programming language ever" in jest. I thought it was funny that you made such a post the day before April Fool's Day.
ISpliter wrote: I am a VB6 programmer and I hate when people do not make the difference between VB6 programmers and other VB programmers.
Uh...Isn't VB6 totally outdated?
From wikipedia: All versions of the Visual Basic development environment from 1.0 to 6.0 are now retired and unsupported by Microsoft.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Mark, VB6 is not outdated at all, it is supported by Microsoft until 2020 - 2023. On Wikypedia the information about some programming languages are false, no wonder that the world begins to have no confidence in the information written there (except for the scientific information which is well filtered). Thank you for the clarification
|
|
|
|
|
You may be joking but in it's day it really was. The technology spawned an entire industry.
|
|
|
|
|
Wasn't it created for those who could not code in real programming language? I would not know as I wrote my first program in year 2000. I used C++ for it. Proud.
|
|
|
|
|
d@nish wrote: Wasn't it created for those who could not code in real programming language? I would not know as I wrote my first program in year 2000. I used C++ for it. Proud.
Hey D@nish,
Well, sort-of, but it turned out to be a much richer programming system than I think even Microsoft expected. At the time the VB line was beginning to make itself front-and-center I had been writing in C/C++ and MASM for a long time. I had even gone so far as to have developed my own event-driven, color, mouse supported user-interface system for DOS by that time. (I had already been in the field about 20 years). The main thing keeping me (as a systems-level developer working in DOS) from embracing the Windows technology was the overly detailed manner in which applications had to be developed to run in Windows. I mean ... a "Hello World" application took something like 135 lines of code written in C/C++ once you constructed the main event loop, invalidation of the window rectangle, yadda yadda. I could see why someone with no other way might want to write Win32 level code (I read Petzold's book too) but to develop applications that way just seemed, to me, to be re-inventing the wheel. I was, at that time, getting tired of bare-metal programming.
At one point (back in 1998 or so) I was tasked with developing a credit-settlement application to run in the Windows desktop. The idea seemed daunting. However I had just discovered VB3 by that time and thought I'd see how that worked out. To my pleasant surprise I was able to focus on the application instead of the arcane details associated with trying to manage overlaid windows, custom controls and the rest. I had finally found the answer to developing for Windows.
In the ensuing years VB3 grew through VB4, VB5 and finally VB6. All during that time I found myself able to develop stuff for the Windows desktop with far more dispatch and design understanding than someone who was struggling with MFC programming. I was interested in getting RESULTS, not trying to prove I was a masochist. Snotty young C++ developers liked to get elitist about all the hotshot things they could do with C++ while those of us writing VB applications were getting business done. (I'm not saying ALL C++ developers are that way, nor am I saying the language doesn't have its place).
The firm I work with now still has a large base of code based on VB6 which has worked well for years. Sure, for new things we have moved onto .Net (I write mostly C# now) but the VB6 code cranks millions of dollars worth of employee time card data on a daily basis. With all of its extensions and 3rd-party support, VB6 has been a juggernaut that will not die easy. As I said earlier, we're moving on as developers to use a more recent technology such as .Net. However, don't let anyone talk you into the idea that VB6 is a "toy". True, a non-programmer can bang out a program with it pretty quickly, but what's wrong with that? Many developers take the elitist view that if it has a low entry-point that it's a "toy". Come into our shop ... I'll show you what a toy it is NOT.
VB6 not "real"? If you believe that I got a bridge out in Arizona I could sell you cheap! 
-CB
|
|
|
|
|
|
@dd@nish
Any intermediate VB6 programmer can put you in the corner of shame (hell, even I can do that). Do not believe me?! read this: Compilers Demystified: Function Pointers in Visual Basic 6.0[^]
I am very proud to be a part of the great VB6 community, where many intelligent programmers reside!
Best regards,
ISpliter
modified 31-Mar-14 20:37pm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Doesn't surprise me a bit.
Most folks that want to "diss" the tool either haven't really used it or are listening to marketing talk. Yeah, it's old and been around for awhile but so has my Raleigh I ride 60 to 70 miles per week. (It's a 1987 model BTW - and more than one person has drooled over it.)
|
|
|
|
|
PHP too, PHP too.
modified 20-Oct-19 21:02pm.
|
|
|
|
|
VB6 best programming language ever: Yes, but PHP is too  , true (however, PHP is a scripting language) , but I agree
|
|
|
|
|
Well VB6.0 was the langugage which keen me on programming. I have never use it in my professional programming, because i did the job with other tools, but there a lot of times where i want to be able to use it. I like it because of its simple syntax and nice enviorment.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, I don't know about best ever, but in its time, it was the best for developing software on Windows platforms.
I was writing software before Windows (COBOEL, FORTRAN, Clipper) and still writing today in more modern languages. I worked in Visual Basic from version 1 through VB6 and into .NET. Most of my programming today is in C#.
VB6 worked great for UI apps and middleware. I wrote Windows services, COM+ DLLs, multithreaded apps, and rarely had any problems. VB6 programs, written correctly, were scalable, fast, and reliable. If the very few places where VB6 code was not the best performer, you could identify that, rewrite it in C or C++, and replace the VB6 DLL with that DLL once you could justify it.
VB6 (and earlier versions) served two markets - 1) the prototyper and non-programmer small utility programmer. That is what some of the quickie UI elements, like the ADO control, were made for; and 2) the professional programmer.
For the latter, the programmer was expected to use good object oriented techniques and not use the amateur tools the VB6 IDE provided for the former. VB6 was not an all-inclusive language, but was open for calling other DLLs, COM or not. For web programming, WebClasses were a great design, but failed to catch on. VB6 programmers who used the language and tool as it was designed to be used, who used good professional programming techniques, found VB6 to be the best tool on the market.
In time, we needed a better implementation of object oriented programming, and an expansion to creating 64 bit programs. VB6, as the IDE and language was designed, with its backwards compatibility, simply could not do that. That is where .NET came in.
I had no problem migrating my VB6 program to VB.NET, and eventually to C#, since I had followed good OO processes when writing in VB6. A lot of VB programmers I knew, who stubbornly retained their procedural programming mindset from the VB3 days had a much more difficult time and had to rewrite much of their code.
In order to help the migration process along for a large VB6 project, I wrote new code in C# such that the DLLs had a COM interop wrapper that allowed them to be called in existing VB6 code the same as if they had been written in VB6, and pure C# "OCXs" that existing VB6 forms and user controls could use straight off the VB6 IDE toolbar. That allows us to replace old VB6 code one piece at a time with C# code and still use the C# components in existing VB6 code.
As much as I think of VB6, though, I don't write new code in VB6 and have not for years. It simply is not a good engineering decision.
|
|
|
|
|
Visual Basic was a major breakthrough in that it was the first widely adopted "visual" programming tool for Windows. But it had severe weaknesses from the start that were never fixed, even by the time they got to version 6.
Borland's Delphi beat the crap out of VB - that is why Microsoft lured Anders Hejlsberg (and others) away from Borland in 1996.
Anders "fixed" VB6 - by killing it and creating C#.
|
|
|
|
|
Really ?! VB6 might be the best language in the world (for obvious reasons). I am a VB6 programmer, what are the weaknesses that you talk about, I do not know for VB6 to have any weaknesses !
Delphi better than VB6 ?! NO, in any event... be realistic! VB6 is in many cases faster than C++, and you talk about Delphi ?! again, be realistic!
|
|
|
|
|
Well, it is the best language (if you know VB6 well enough), depends on what you use it. It has a very wide margin of types of applications. It is a very cool language and fast as hell.
|
|
|
|
|
You are a joker, I like you. However, this time you did not make a good joke since Visual Basic 6.0 is the first in the polls
|
|
|
|
|
It is the best programming language. No doubt
|
|
|
|
|
Now that gay marriage has been legalised in the UK, does it mean that rams in Wales -- and not just ewes -- have to be afraid?
|
|
|
|
|
Only of the women.
Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it. --- George Santayana (December 16, 1863 – September 26, 1952)
Those who fail to clear history are doomed to explain it. --- OriginalGriff (February 24, 1959 – ∞)
|
|
|
|
|
Hey OG,
How have you been?.... a very long time. Rahul here. I needed to ask you some very important questions . I sent you a mail too. I hope you just find it in time.
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Rahul! Been busy, and your email slipped down the pile, because it needs thinking about, rather than an instant response. Then the power goes out this morning so I'm behind schedule - way behind - and trying to catch back up (Still 38 unread emails I need to look at from today!) and will get back to you later today.
Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it. --- George Santayana (December 16, 1863 – September 26, 1952)
Those who fail to clear history are doomed to explain it. --- OriginalGriff (February 24, 1959 – ∞)
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
