Re: VB6, VB2005, or Something Else?


"Paul Clement" <UseAdddressAtEndofMessage@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:adpt029b1qh7ark57gcm7dtipl3behg38f@xxxxxxxxxx
On Tue, 7 Mar 2006 18:48:43 -0600, "Dan Barclay" <Dan@xxxxxxxx> wrote:


¤ > ¤ <sarcasm>
¤ > ¤ Yup, that's why all the serious programmers are migrating so rapidly
to
¤ > ¤ vFred.
¤ > ¤ </sarcasm>
¤ > ¤
¤ > ¤ MS seriously "misunderestimated" this issue.
¤ > ¤
¤ > ¤ Dan
¤ >
¤ > No one was really complaining about the removal of GoSub other than
you.
¤ > Others (who didn't use it)
¤ > mentioned it in "passing" but it was one of the weaker arguments with
¤ > respect to the "language
¤ > stability" issue.
¤
¤ Believe what you want. There is a hell of a lot of code out there
useing
¤ GoSub. Whether current developers know how to use it properly or not
(or
¤ will admit to using it), the existing *code base* has a lot.
¤

I don't doubt that there may be a lot of code out there which implements
GoSub. But then I sincerely
doubt that any of those applications would be targeting Visual Basic.NET
anyway

Clue: Chicken/Egg. How many people are bringing their VBClassic apps to
..Net? Well, I really should ask: How many are bringing their VBClassic apps
to .Net *as VB*?

and many are
probably DOS BASIC apps and not Visual Basic apps.

They probably *were* DOS Basic apps at one time yup.

It simply wasn't used as much because it wasn't
necessary in order to create sub routines. A lot of Visual Basic
developers never even touched it,
as they had never worked with a BASIC language before and had little or no
familiarity with GoSub.

Nested procs weren't a part of many languages. It's a good tool when it
helps the app.

¤ Not only did MS remove it, they *reused* the Return keyword when there
was
¤ no need to. That completely prevented their fixing the problem when
they
¤ discovered how much code could not be moved because of it.
¤

Replacing GoSub code is trivial. That is, unless you're writing spaghetti
code (which is certainly
likely if GoSub is used).

That only shows how little you know about proper use of GoSub. Check into
proper use of nested procs, which can hardly be used for spaghetti code. If
all you know how to do is write spaghetti then you need to be using some
language that prevents it altogether, and I don't know of one offhand.

¤ FWIW, I also know that in the code surveys they did some time back the
code
¤ was "selected" by users and didn't represent all the actual code base.
With
¤ folks crapping all over GoSub I doubt many included "legacy" code in
their
¤ response.
¤
¤ I don't doubt that you believe there are few GoSubs out there. You're
¤ wrong... so is MS. Not that it matters any more.
¤

Correct, that is what I believe and I haven't seen any questions from
anyone having difficulty
converting their GoSub code to equivalent Visual Basic.NET code.

There are no questions to ask! What question you *you* ask? You rewrite
the code to either use the GoSub fragment inline (meaning repeated code
fragments) or you make a Sub out of it (meaning very large parameter lists).

Dan


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: VB6, VB2005, or Something Else?
    ... ¤> language and it can be easily ... But if you're using several GoSubs in a Sub or Function then it's ... The ability to write bad code is not an excuse to use GoSub. ... I'd have to use a knife, but I would miss the screwdriver. ...
    (microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion)
  • Re: VB6, VB2005, or Something Else?
    ... By the way, the preformance of Gosub in PCode was quite good, it ... ¤ ... I'm not complaining about the necessary changes, ... that Microsoft intentionally and unnecessarily made it more difficult. ...
    (microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion)
  • Re: VB6, VB2005, or Something Else?
    ... ¤ Couldn't the same be said of those who don't use GoSub? ... Since GoSub is part of the language ... Generally code posted in the forums are short secuences to solve certain ... Just like C programmers looked down upon VB programmers. ...
    (microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion)
  • Re: VB6, VB2005, or Something Else?
    ... ¤ Paul Clement wrote: ... ¤> Can I assume you're considering something just a little more ... MS didn't properly implement the GoSub ... respect for the language or the users. ...
    (microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion)
  • Re: VB6, VB2005, or Something Else?
    ... ¤> Replacing GoSub code is trivial. ... have spaghetti code then hopefully you understand how it got that way to begin with. ... ¤> converting their GoSub code to equivalent Visual Basic.NET code. ...
    (microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion)
Loading