Re: VB6, VB2005, or Something Else?

<shrug> You are right, they screwed up both and I wish they'd changed
neither. I happen to think core language is more important because there is
simply no excuse to tie that to the platform. As I mentioned earlier, it is
the effect that counts.

You call it unacceptable for your reasons, I'll call it unacceptable for
mine.

Dan


"Paul Clement" <UseAdddressAtEndofMessage@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:0l0p02dlr5ebjhek0mvbo37biobeu9hhlv@xxxxxxxxxx
On Mon, 6 Mar 2006 10:33:26 -0600, "Dan Barclay" <Dan@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

¤
¤ "Paul Clement" <UseAdddressAtEndofMessage@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
message
¤ news:2fho02p1g4a52a0e09j7ab1co6hjik5n62@xxxxxxxxxx
¤ > On Fri, 3 Mar 2006 18:00:52 -0600, "Dan Barclay" <Dan@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
¤ >
¤ > ¤ Andre,
¤ > ¤
¤ > ¤ Don't confuse language issues with library issues.
¤ > ¤
¤ > ¤ The core problem with VB.Net is that the language itself is changed.
¤ >
¤ > To be honest, a high percentage of the language is still intact. Many
of
¤ > the significant
¤ > compatibility issues documented are specific to the language
extensions
¤ > and not so much the language
¤ > itself. This has been pointed out before.
¤
¤ I wish you knew what you were talking about and that this were true.
¤
¤ 1. "a high percentage of the language is still intact" isn't enough
that
¤ you don't have to rewrite the application. More correctly "a very high
¤ percentage of existing code will require rewrite and retest".
Regardless of
¤ the cause, it's the effect that is important.
¤

Hold up a moment there. I believe I pointed out in the past that changes
to the extensions would
necessitate changes to the code. I used several examples to illustrate
that this had occurred on a
number of occasions in the past. Now you say the cause isn't important,
regardless of what it is.
Well hell, that's exactly what I was saying!

¤ 2. If the compatibilitiy issues were in extensions then existing code
not
¤ using the extensions should convert with no errors. Or, perhaps, we
need to
¤ know what you define as "extensions". If you look at VB5/6 language
¤ reference I presume these things you are discussing are *not* in there?
¤

Well no that is incorrect. There were changes to *both* the core language
*and* extensions and by
far I see Classic developers having more problems replacing functionality
supported by the
extensions than by the core language.

¤ In any case, finding a "core" that lets me maintain common code between
.Net
¤ and Win32 applications does not appear to be in the cards no matter what
¤ cause you choose to assign it. Again, the effect is the issue not the
¤ cause.
¤
¤ Of course you knew that since it's been explained so many times. Either
¤ that or you choose to ignore it in which case I am wasting my time
(again
¤ again) explaining it to you.

No because every time I mentioned that language extensions were routinely
changed, you would throw
the "core language stability is paramount" at me. Code is code. It doesn't
matter whether it's based
upon language extensions, which just about every VB app in existence is,
or the core language. You
change either, you break it.


Paul
~~~~
Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Microsoft Printer Compatibility Library 1.0 now available
    ... That it is, and you're right, RPG III was the first version that had real ... upgrade and it's not going to happen all that often. ... works, and that's a GREAT thing, but it's too bad the totally hosed language ... ¤ ...
    (microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion)
  • Re: VB coverage in new online mag - VB6 or VB.NET?
    ... >> ¤ successfully, others did not. ... >> to that environment. ... Don't confuse the product with the language. ... > realize, of course, that dotNet is not TheLastBigThing any more than Win32 ...
    (microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion)
  • Re: Developer Use of Visual Basic Plummets
    ... There is no way to know whether Microsoft will change the product ... ¤ ... Why is it confusing? ... but syntax is a very small part of a language. ...
    (microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion)
  • Re: VB6, VB2005, or Something Else?
    ... widely used programming ... language during that time. ... there sure as heck a lot more VB programmers than COBOL ones. ... ¤> Visual Basic would have continued to be the also-ran. ...
    (microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion)
  • Re: VB6, VB2005, or Something Else?
    ... ¤> ¤ Andre, ... ¤> ¤ The core problem with VB.Net is that the language itself is changed. ... I believe I pointed out in the past that changes to the extensions would ... extensions than by the core language. ...
    (microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion)
Loading