|
vb - blech, yeppers.
I try to stay away from it as much as possible 
"Real programmers just throw a bunch of 1s and 0s at the computer to see what sticks" - Pete O'Hanlon
|
|
|
|
|
I think this option is missing : We have never and will never (even under torture) use VB
i vote for this one 
|
|
|
|
|
Alexandre GRANVAUD wrote: I think this option is missing : We have never and will never (even under torture) use VB
what abt we some time use vb 6.0 to check out programming competency
|
|
|
|
|
All 4GL and above programming languages are evolved from C.
"Silence will create respect and dignity; justice and fair play will bring more friends;
benevolence and charity will enhance prestige and position; courtesy will draw benevolence;
service of mankind will secure leadership and good words will overcome powerful enemies"
Ali (Peace be upon him)
|
|
|
|
|
Nisamudheen wrote: programming languages are evolved from C.
...which has evolved from B, and this one evolved from BCPL, which is really a simplified CPL. CPL in turn has it roots in Algol, and Fortran is the "daddy" of Algol.
Moral of the story? Let's go and get some cofee.
|
|
|
|
|
All right. I meant the baseline is C
"Silence will create respect and dignity; justice and fair play will bring more friends;
benevolence and charity will enhance prestige and position; courtesy will draw benevolence;
service of mankind will secure leadership and good words will overcome powerful enemies"
Ali (Peace be upon him)
|
|
|
|
|
which evolved from the brains of people that evolved from amoeba.
|
|
|
|
|
if U go further... they are all a layer to make the real ultimate language: assembler!!!
Hurra for assembler!!!
But I'm lazy, so I don't develop in assembler. And as I'm stupid, I'm sick of using pointers, so develop in C#
Paillave
|
|
|
|
|
func MicroSoft
bigBrother:
push Vista
test os, vista
jne bigBrother
push c_sharp
end Microsoft ; ????
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
|
|
|
|
|
I jumped ship to Delphi when it was first released, stayed with it for seven years then jumpt to C#. Haven't looked back since.
Andy
|
|
|
|
|
Jump from MFC to .net/c# glad to see the back of MFC after spending so many years with it.
.net is a box of never ending treasures, every day I get find another gem.
|
|
|
|
|
It's not the language it's the ability of a non computer proficient user to able able to learn VB then consider themselves programmers, hence badly designed code and user interfaces. I've seen this happen in many project during the '90s. I also found VB too restrictive and the syntax somewhat clumsy, but hey thats my opinion. c# seems to address the needs where C++ required heavy costumisation of the UI, with MFC and other frameworks it was a slow and labourious process to constuct a rich UI. C++ is great for backend and critical processing of data.
.net is a box of never ending treasures, every day I get find another gem.
|
|
|
|
|
Agreed, As a programmer that works in a hospital I have seen my share of poorly constructed VB programs. It looks like some companies farm their entire project out to a single 10 year old programmer and then go on to sell their product at $2500 a seat while management laughs all the way to the bank.
John
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah that's coincidental, I've seen Hospitals, Airports, Manufacturing all failed attempts at recreating complex business management systems. It seems the choice of choosing VB was the labour costs are alot cheaper than professional programmers/software engineers.
.net is a box of never ending treasures, every day I get find another gem.
|
|
|
|
|
There are not bad languages, there are bad programmers, whatever language they use.
|
|
|
|
|
I have to agree! I have seen some POORLY written C# applications as well as horrific Classic ASP pages. Poor programmers can get their bad practices and even worse code applied to just about ANY programming/scripting language!
JamminJimE
Microsoft Certified Application Developer
|
|
|
|
|
We made the error in 1997 of believing vb was the tool to make our project, ms did whatever was necessary to make us belive in VB, and so we did it, ive spent last 3 years porting and normalizing code to move out to c++, probably next year it will be all finished, im talking about around a million lines of code, lots and lots of functionality, but this time, im not using any .net monstrosity.
|
|
|
|
|
Jan Rodriguez wrote: made the error in 1997 of believing vb
Jan Rodriguez wrote: but this time, im not using any .net monstrosity
So back in 1997 you were using .net? or I am reading this wrong?
.net is a box of never ending treasures, every day I get find another gem.
|
|
|
|
|
Nah, I think he meant that he was using vb back in 1997. .NET wasn't around at that time 
WM.
What about weapons of mass-construction?
"What? Its an Apple MacBook Pro. They are sexy!" - Paul Watson
|
|
|
|
|
I think you are reading wrong. He says they did a huge project using VB that they started in 1997. in 2004 they find out that if they want to survive they have to move, because MS decided to kill theirs support to VB. Off course after that bad experience no one want to go back with MS and follow them in their new trend. That is why he says: "but this time, im not using any .net monstrosity"
|
|
|
|
|
He wrote that they used then VB. And his conclusion is NOT using .net.
Greetings from Germany
|
|
|
|
|
Ofcourse you read it wrong 
Probably he mean, he chose VB6 in 1997...
As the other threads states, C++ is useful for Critical Implementations, Ever growing functionalities & code, Ever Maintained Projects which goes beyond Programming Languages... something thats was started at 90s now getting converted to VB.NET/C#.NET apps (this excludes few time updated personal software like budget planning, birthday tracking etc.,).
VB in any form is somewhat uncomfortable (but not completely) to write million lines of code or 1000s of functionalities...
|
|
|
|
|
Were doing our GUI-Software mostly via C++ with MFC-use and we have tried one C#-Solution and it makes a lot of additional working and testing.
But nobody wont to blame C#, I am uppset about this dishonisty. 
I think MS will drop MFC/C++ Development to push people to .net, so in future we will have to make a decision whether using C# or another class library as QT (Trolltech).
Greetings from Germany
|
|
|
|
|
I dont think ms will remove suport for unmanaged c++ compiling, i dunno about MFC, i saw their last move trying to mix ATL and MFC in a desperate attempt to save MFC, even if it meant breaking a bit of ATL.
|
|
|
|
|
KarstenK wrote: I think MS will drop MFC/C++ Development to push people to .net, so in future we will have to make a decision whether using C# or another class library as QT (Trolltech).
hopefully we'll be able to use QT and boost libraries or something alike and c++ will always be 
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
