Re: VB6, VB2005, or Something Else?

On Mon, 10 Apr 2006 20:24:50 +0100, "Gary Nelson" <gn@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Gary,

¤ > 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.
¤

Point is that you've had several years now to decide what to do. If you think that continuing to
complain about it for the next five years is going to help then I have some bad news. That may sound
harsh and it may be unfortunate but that's the reality of it.

¤ > ¤ 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?
¤

I'm the one who is apparently ignorant. Why ask me?

¤ >
¤ > ¤ > 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.
¤

I wasn't completely happy with learning new object models either. Especially the data access
libraries that seem to change every three to five years. Those changes require almost *complete*
code rewrites.

But guess what? I decided to move forward because the alternative is obsolescence.

¤ > ¤ > 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!
¤

How does that "clean up" the language? Is there something unusual about the While...Wend/End While
construct? Is it somehow an implementation that is unique to the Visual Basic language?

¤ > 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.

You have me convinced that it's at the bottom of yours as well.


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: VB6, VB2005, or Something Else?
    ... I happen to think core language is more important because there is ... ¤> ¤ Andre, ... to the extensions would ...
    (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)