Re: VB coverage in new online mag - VB6 or VB.NET?
- From: "Bob Butler" <tiredofit@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 08:14:00 -0700
"Huw Collingbourne" <huw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:uTaCcUqPFHA.2068@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> "Tony Proctor" <tony_proctor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
> message news:O9LSMJqPFHA.248@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> I agree with the balanced view, but also including an objective view
>> of porting issues from VB "classic" to VB.Net. Microsoft seem to
>> have it in their head that it's merely a case of not wanting to, or
>> not being able to, learn a new language, or the demise of much-loved
>> features of the language or IDE. In reality, there are sound
>> problems associated with the need to re-write an existing commercial
>> product.
>
> What do you think about the migration tools/support provided for
> VB6->VB.NET?
They are, at best, an insult to VB developers.
> By comparsion, it seems to me that Borland has put far more effort
> into helping Delphi programmers convert from Win32 to .NET.
Which is why a lot of long-time VB shops are considering Delphi. If it
wasn't Pascal-based I'd be considering it too (I just personally *hate*
Pascal).
> They've even written a complete .NET version of Delphi's VCL class library
> which lets programmers load up Win32 Delphi projects and, in many
> cases, just compile and run without any recoding.
Yes, they understand the absolutely critical need for that ability. MS
doesn't.
> Obviously, you have
> to rewrite code if you've been using lots of API calls.
similar to the VB 16->32 bit transition; changes that are actually required
due to the differences in the underlying platform are reasonable to expect.
The plethora of gratuitous changes made in VB.Net mean that thousands of
lines of mission-critical code need to be rewritten for no benefit. The
investment in time required to review and test every bit of code effectively
means halting any new development work while the code is ported. At some
point it may have to be done as the underlying OS changes and people fell
compelled to move forward for various reasons but it doesn't mean that it
has to be done in VB.Net; a language like Delphi that promises more in the
way to long-term stability is very attractive compared to the great unknown
that is MS.
> All the same,
> I have to say that I've been impressed by the work that Borland has
> put into supporting Delphi developers migrating to .NET.
Exactly; had MS made a serious attempt to provide a transition there'd still
be grumblings about the bumps along the way but I'd guess that a lot more
VB6 developers would have made the transition by now instead of searching
for alternatives. I know that I would have been much more inclined to do
so.
> Would I be right to think that many VB programmers have been less
impressed by
> the work that MS has put into supporting the migration of VB6 to
> .NET....?
What work has MS done? An "upgrade wizard" that replaces working code with
code that may or may not act the same way and a ton of comments where even
it knows that the code has to be rewritten? It's too pathetic for words.
--
Reply to the group so all can participate
VB.Net: "Fool me once..."
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- VB coverage in new online mag - VB6 or VB.NET?
- From: Huw Collingbourne
- Re: VB coverage in new online mag - VB6 or VB.NET?
- From: Chris Dunaway
- Re: VB coverage in new online mag - VB6 or VB.NET?
- From: Tony Proctor
- Re: VB coverage in new online mag - VB6 or VB.NET?
- From: Huw Collingbourne
- VB coverage in new online mag - VB6 or VB.NET?
- Prev by Date: Re: VB coverage in new online mag - VB6 or VB.NET?
- Next by Date: Re: NT Service Control
- Previous by thread: Re: VB coverage in new online mag - VB6 or VB.NET?
- Next by thread: Re: VB coverage in new online mag - VB6 or VB.NET?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
