|
I programmed in Amstrad CPC 6128 (#Griff #signature) in BASIC, and this basic has nothing to do with VB6. It was _really_ for beginners.
I would not describe VB6 as good performing, but there was some point of time where it was one of the only choices available with a great compatibility with MSOffice tools. Actually, the success of it probably came from the Macro tools in Office, before it was a thing on its own, even when I am not 100% sure of what I am stating.
|
|
|
|
|
VBA (what drives the macros in office) was VB6 embedded in Office, VB6 came first. VBA is Visual Basic for Applications.
|
|
|
|
|
The B does not stand for BASIC, but for "BEGINNERS". With C++ and Delphi there were enough alternatives.
VB6 was Access on steroids. VB.NET is born from that.
--edit
Who in their right mind would risc the existence of their enterprise by allowing VB-code?
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
Access on Steroids...Hmmmm
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: The B does not stand for BASIC, but for "BEGINNERS"
I was referring to the "B" in "VB".
|
|
|
|
|
So was I. The B in VB stands for BASIC, which is a "beginners allpurpose symbolic instruction code".
The real humor was in MS selling a "professional" version of the product. I have worked for these kinds of professional beginners 
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
That might be true if it was Visual BASIC, but it's not, it's Visual Basic. The Basic in VB is not an acronym, it is to reflect the roots of the language.
|
|
|
|
|
It is just another BASIC-dialect. It doesn't just reflect the root, it reflects the targetted audience.
VB is one of the few languages where people can be "productive" without much knowledge of the system they're working on. That in itself is reflected again in the quality of the products built with it.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: It doesn't just reflect the root, it reflects the targetted audience.
Not according to Microsoft.
|
|
|
|
|
That must be why they call it "Wawa", and not "Basic". Aw, wait, it is called Basic!
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, it is, now go troll somewhere else.
|
|
|
|
|
It has been well documented how Microsoft regretted naming it basic; the "professional" thingy was there to convince people that it was not "just" for beginners.
It is not trolling, just history. And me disliking the concept does not make VB6 any less of a succes.
--edit
I would be extremely happy if one of my applications had 10% the success of VB6
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
At what time? I did my first BASIC programming in 1975. I don't remember anything about C++ and Delphi from those days.
|
|
|
|
|
You are pretty right.
You are pretty old too. 
(just kidding)
|
|
|
|
|
For my 60th birthday earlier this year I had a T-shirt made wiht the text:
"You don's have to be SENILE to be DEMENTED ... but it sure helps!"
(In Norwegian, as well in several other European languages, "senile" has been adopted as a short form of "senile dementia" in informal speech, although the "senile" means nothing but "old" - medical services classifies anyone of 60 years and older as senile.)
I did my first Basic programming as a high school exchange student in Minnesota: A huge Univac 1100 mainframe was set up in the Twin Cities, with 440 modems for use by 1500 schools all over the state. My school couldn't afford a "high speed" 300 bps modem; we had just a standard 110 bps one. But in those days, Basic provided only 286 numeric variables, named A-Z and A0-A9...Z0-Z9, and 26 strings named A$-Z$. So by character count, programs were small and compact!
|
|
|
|
|
Member 7989122 wrote: At what time? I did my first BASIC programming in 1975. I don't remember anything about C++ and Delphi from those days.
That might be due to Windows being created 10 years later. Same for GW-BASIC, 1985. Even Turbo Pascal is from 1983.
With "at the time" I'm obviously referencing to the period in which Visual Basic 6 was actively sold by MS, not the dawn of mankind where we just invented fire.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
glennPattonWork wrote: I came to Windows from the embedded side, really reading data coming in via various ports and showing in Windows. VB6 was the quickest way as the company was run by a Micro-Sharft consultant.
Before .NET, there was only two choices for embedded software; eVC or eVB.
Gotta love your Mono 
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
Only for big embedded products that didn't use a Micro-controller. C still rules the small world!
|
|
|
|
|
However C++ is arriving (and Lua, and MicroPython).
|
|
|
|
|
Just don't see the point, C++ I would not trust to bloat... also class, pah! struct...
|
|
|
|
|
I do see the point. There is no bloat, unless you explicitely put it in.
C++ is multi paradigm: you may also use it effectively just as 'better C'.
As matter of fact I welcome the introduction of C++ in PIC32 microcontrollers code development.
|
|
|
|
|
Sure, a C++ compiler can compile your source code using only the plain C subset of C++.
The question is: Are you then develping in C, or in C++?
|
|
|
|
|
That wouldn't make much sense.
C++ has a lot of interesting features (templates for instance), even without considering OOP.
|
|
|
|
|
Our principal application is almost 2 million lines of VB.Net. As a c# developer I was hesitant but it really is just about getting your head around a more verbose syntax and several months to break the semi-colon and curly braces habit! Wherever possible, I still prefer c# as it feels more grown up. The biggest issue is finding engineers willing to work with VB.Net - the second you mention VB the phone goes dead...
Keep your friends close. Keep Kill your enemies closer.
The End
|
|
|
|
|
Nice flame war!  A nice reminder of the VB shaming that exists here. 
As a solo developer the choice between C# and VB is dependent on one thing only: Which one am I the most productive in? it all boils down to the same MSIL anyway and my clients don't care.
Now, back to the VB shaming. (since it's Saturday) It seems that haters will hate. The same old weak arguments regurgitated to prove why their beloved C# is superior and VB is trash and not worthy for serious work...or that programmers who prefer (or are stuck with) VB are inferior and should be scorned and ridiculed.
I think as a community, we can do better than to get all evangelical about something so petty. I don't have a dog in this fight...I like them both equally...just a tool to get a job done.
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
