Re: VB6, VB2005, or Something Else?
- From: "Gary Nelson" <gn@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 20:24:50 +0100
Paul,
Then given what we have known for several years now, how would you
describe it?
I suppose because "what we have known for several years now", became know
after we had hundreds of thousands of lines of code in place already. If we
had been well informed well before writing all of that code I believe it
would be a different case. At any rate, even code with no GoSubs does not
easily convert to .net, so I don't really see your point.
¤ I'm not denying that there are alternative solutions. The problem with
the
¤ alternative solutions is that they would bankrupt our company. That is
NOT a
¤ solution.
¤
So if making the change from GoSub to Subs/Functions would bankrupt your
company then it sounds like
you should just leave the code as it is.
Ignorance is bliss. As if the only problem were the GoSubs, how about the
control arrays? How about all of the other hundreds of things that make it
impossible to port the code?
¤ > Isn't one of
¤ > the responsibilities of a programmer to develop alternative solutions
when
¤ > a change to the platform
¤ > or language occurs?
¤
¤ My job is to develop solutions to my clients' problems. It would have
been
¤ nice if that was MS's job too.
¤
They do but apparently that *is* the problem for some.
Paul, if I were the only one complaining, you could smile smugly in your
confidence. But I am just one of many of MS's clients that are not at all
happy about what they have done.
¤ > Once again, there has never been any functionality added to the
language
¤ > which actually improved
¤ > upon the intended purpose of this construct, rendering it dated. It's
¤ > frequently used and nothing
¤ > has changed that. The same is not true for GoSub.
¤
¤ Do...Loop doesn't improve on While...Wend (End While)? Even if it is
¤ frequently used, it would be very simple to do a replace.
¤
Probably so, but why?
Why not? To clean up the language of course!
I'm not sure why you're focusing on one factor, as other's have, when I've
mentioned at least two or
three.
¤ > Sounds like it will be hurting for a long time until you decide to
address
¤ > it. In addition, if you
¤ > are continuing to use GoSub in new code then you have little to
complain
¤ > about.
¤
¤ If addressing it means bankrupting my company, yes it will be a very
long
¤ time. My guess is that it will be the same for others in the same boat.
I'm sorry but I can't believe that the basis for the survival of your
company is dependent upon
GoSub.
The basis for the survival of our company is taking our code into the
future. That seems to be at the bottom of Microsoft's agenda.
Gary
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: VB6, VB2005, or Something Else?
- From: Paul Clement
- Re: VB6, VB2005, or Something Else?
- References:
- Re: VB6, VB2005, or Something Else?
- From: Gary Nelson
- Re: VB6, VB2005, or Something Else?
- From: Paul Clement
- Re: VB6, VB2005, or Something Else?
- From: Gary Nelson
- Re: VB6, VB2005, or Something Else?
- From: Paul Clement
- Re: VB6, VB2005, or Something Else?
- From: Gary Nelson
- Re: VB6, VB2005, or Something Else?
- From: Paul Clement
- Re: VB6, VB2005, or Something Else?
- Prev by Date: Re: VB6, VB2005, or Something Else?
- Next by Date: Re: VB6, VB2005, or Something Else?
- Previous by thread: Re: VB6, VB2005, or Something Else?
- Next by thread: Re: VB6, VB2005, or Something Else?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|