|
I had to migrate several projects from 6 to .NET back when. I found re-writing was pretty straightforward, the only thing that really slowed me up was not being able to use arrays of controls (which the VB6 projects used extensively). Worked out a work-around (which needed much more coding, but ran eventually). Good luck.
|
|
|
|
|
It's almost undoubtedly true that this code needs to be updated from an architectural standpoint as well. No disrespect to the soon-to-be retiree.
I've been in a situation where the code was crap, but nobody on the business side could explain how it was supposed to work. Thus, reworking it was more of, "well, good luck, hope you figure it out." Hope you're not in that situation, Sander.
|
|
|
|
|
Undoubtedly, this programmer is known to use hidden controls to hold values because variables are too difficult 
agolddog wrote: Thus, reworking it was more of, "well, good luck, hope you figure it out." Hope you're not in that situation, Sander.
I hope so too! 
|
|
|
|
|
The company I work for has a large VB6 code base. I am the project lead for updating the main application to .NET 6 WPF/MVVM. In the span of about an year, one other developer and me have migrated about 75% of the old application.
I would definitely stay away from the automatic converter tools. While they do work, you will be left with the same mess of an application that you originally inherited. Now is the time to use modern design principals to develop a testable and extensible application. Not to mention multiple threads!
We also made the decision to keep the same look and feel as the VB6 application. Users have 20+ years of experience with the VB6 application, so giving them something completely new that works differently was met with major objections.
Instead of thinking "Run", think I have the opportunity to build something from scratch using a better architecture and use cutting edge technology. That sounds like a lot of fun to me.
modified 31-Mar-23 10:49am.
|
|
|
|
|
Tyler Evensen wrote: Instead of thinking "Run", think I have the opportunity to build something from scratch using a better architecture and use cutting edge technology. That sounds like a lot of fun to me.
Yeah, my thoughts exactly.
These are not easy jobs, but they can be quite fulfilling.
We plan to keep the UI more-or-less the same, but to give it a more modern look and feel.
No big overhauls there anyway.
Hopefully the client will say the same.
|
|
|
|
|
Having written and rewritten many programs in the last 35 years I can honestly say that without looking at the way you code I can't tell if the converters will work or not. Even current converters like Telrik have issues converting C# to VB.NET have issues.
The one thing that is 100% certain is this. If you review what you used to do and compare it to what you can now do you will probably get rid of a large portion of old code that is no longer needed.
If you worked in VB6 before .net and then you opened, closed, parsed files the old fashioned way either in binary or text. You can now ditch nearly all of that code lets face appending a line of text to a file used to take 10 lines of code now, 1 maybe 2? Splitting and parsing lines are now inherent, so is mid$ (now substring) and there are lots of new features to just the string object. vb6 had Drag and Drop nightmares .NET a breeze.
My point is the GUID may or may not change but the majority of code behind it probably won't take long to deal with side by side. If you run a conversion and it fails then you have to discover and repair code you didn't write and that sucks.
I rewrote a utility yesterday because it was built in 2001 and updated, but not rewritten in 2003. I opened the old code on one side the new on the other and reviewed it. The classes I had written had very few issues and with a few minor modifications those were done in less than a 1/2 hour. The rest of the time I spent dumping old code I no longer need and, I added a barcode class I had built about 5 years ago. In short I have a new tool that is 10 times faster, more capable and easier to use for the users.
I would say if you have a conversation system you can test it but then look at the code. If you don't understand it, rewrite it. If it fails, rewrite it....or just rewrite it. And don't believe those that say VB.NET is going away soon. They have said that for 15 years and it is more common than you know.
The old man in Illinois
|
|
|
|
|
Sander I have a copy of VB 6.0 Professional Edition + Library on CD IF needed which I doubt!
Also two great books "The Waite Groups VB 6 Interactive Course" and Murach's VB 6
You are welcome to all FREE.
Challenges and Work. Work pays the bills. Challenges can be fun but seem to create bills.
When you have time lets us know about the progress it will thoroughly enjoyed by many.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm doing that right now. I got hired to fix some VB6 stuff and then write a connected app in webforms .net.
After that they kept me on to do support and maintenance. As time allows, I re-write the VB6 to vb.net. Anything new is vb.net.
In a couple of instances I needed some of the VB6 functionality in vb.net to do some quick and dirty work. I copied the VB6 to a vb.net module and just went through line by line to make it compile in vb.net. It was surprisingly easy. I'd not recommend that for anything that is going to be maintained long term, but it might get you "over the hump" while port/re-write.
Someone else posted link her the tools and instructions to get VB6 to work on Windows 10. It actually works pretty well!
Also the are a couple of project underway to build IDEs and compilers for VB6. Twin BASIC looks pretty impressive. Here is a link to learn more: https://www.vbforums.com/showthread.php?890181-TwinBasic[^]
Good luck.
PS: Ask for a raise. They going have a tough time finding some who wants that job!
|
|
|
|
|
Had to do this a few years ago and ended up using VS 2005 to convert the code. It worked pretty well - even handled the many control arrays. The biggest problem was none of the custom controls we purchased would convert (or even install), so a lot of the GUI had to be rebuilt.
|
|
|
|
|
Did you know about TwinBasic? Maybe try this as an escape hatch from VB6.
TwinBasic is free but runs slower than normal until you buy a monthly subscription to get full version and your code will run about 3x faster than the free version of TwinBasic.
My broad recommendation is the following
- convert the DBase to a modern database like SQLite or SQLServer, hopefully with the VB6 intact and still running the same, so now you have the data layer more solid
- convert the front-end VB6 to TwinBasic.
With a bit of luck your code will compile with little to no modification.
- you might be able to stop here, with a modern TwinBasic application running your VB6 after conversion
- otherwise, my next step would be rewrite your VB6/TwinBasic forms as React frontend with .NET server code running the backend (maybe this code is installed on your local machine, maybe a remote server, maybe both).
- This is now mostly a rewrite of the frontend with React (initially inside embedded TwinBasic web browser control) As the new UI, and incrementally converting the backend to .NET until the app is able to run completely browser-based, then you can leave the TwinBasic code once you no longer need to support desktop installations.
Learn more about TwinBasic here:
twinBASIC GitHub
twinBASIC Updates
|
|
|
|
|
OK, I'm going to throw the pigeons to the cat here - you need to define your required outcomes first.
and the main question is... who are the users?
Does this really need to be a web enabled application?
If your users are all known, internal users, then why does it need to be web enabled? It probably doesn't.
And I'm guessing that as a VB6 app this will be the case.
If all the users are internal and you can dish the application out as a desktop application, even via Remote Desktop Services then your most cost effective solution may be an Access application (hears howls from the gallery). But it will do the job at a fraction of the cost of a .net application.
If it need to be web enabled, or it really needs to be .Net
then don't fluff around with VB.net, just learn C#.
It's not that hard.
But it will be time consuming and hard on the budget because it's .net, not because it's C#.
There is a reason why VB6 has been hard to kill and it little to do with syntax.
Kent
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Sander,
is it possible to send you an email with a possible solution (at least there is a chance)?
greetings,
Thomas
I cannot remember: What did I before google?
|
|
|
|
|
Pull out sketch first - letter learner to start with (10)
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
In a closed society where everybody's guilty, the only crime is getting caught. In a world of thieves, the only final sin is stupidity. - Hunter S Thompson - RIP
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 649 4/6
⬜⬜⬜⬜🟨
⬜🟩🟩🟩⬜
🟩🟩🟩🟩⬜
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 649 2/6
⬛🟩🟨⬛🟨
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 649 5/6
🟨⬜⬜⬜⬜
⬜⬜🟩⬜⬜
⬜🟩🟩🟩⬜
⬜🟩🟩🟩⬜
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 649 3/6*
🟨🟩⬜⬜🟨
⬜🟩🟩🟩🟩
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 649 4/6
🟨🟨🟨⬛⬛
🟨⬛⬛⬛⬛
⬛🟩🟩🟩🟩
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
Nice, I could have gotten it in 3. This has been fast and straightforward.
GCS/GE d--(d) s-/+ a C+++ U+++ P-- L+@ E-- W+++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- r+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 649 3/6
⬜🟩🟨⬜🟨
⬜🟩🟩🟩🟩
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
In a closed society where everybody's guilty, the only crime is getting caught. In a world of thieves, the only final sin is stupidity. - Hunter S Thompson - RIP
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 649 4/6*
⬜⬜🟩🟩⬜
⬜⬜🟩🟩⬜
🟨🟩🟩🟩⬜
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
Happiness will never come to those who fail to appreciate what they already have. -Anon
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 649 3/6
🟨🟨⬜🟨⬜
⬜🟩🟩🟩🟩
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 649 6/6
⬛⬛🟨⬛🟨
🟨🟨🟨⬛⬛
⬛🟨⬛🟨🟨
⬛⬛🟩🟨🟨
🟩🟩🟩🟩⬛
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 649 3/6
🟨🟨⬛🟨🟨
⬛🟩🟩🟩🟩
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
|
|
|
|
|
Wordle 649 6/6
⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜
⬜🟨🟨🟨⬜
🟨🟨⬜⬜🟨
⬜🟩🟩🟩⬜
🟨🟩🟩🟩⬜
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
whew
"A little time, a little trouble, your better day"
Badfinger
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
