Re: vb6 -v- Net!

Tech-Archive recommends: Speed Up your PC by fixing your registry


"Robert Conley" <robertsconley@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1175180235.183963.66350@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Mar 27, 2:11 pm, "Robert Morley"
<rmor...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Which, as I understand it, comes back to the fact that .NET is unusably
slow
unless you go the unmanaged code route.

Any "managed" system is going to be slow. QuickBASIC, VB, Java, COM,
and now .NET.

Last I heard, no previous version of basic was a managed system. Perhaps in
the strictest sense, but not in any meaningful sense when compared with
VB.NET.

The trick is to write a good wrapper around the
unmanaged bit.

Which in .NET implies that you MUST convert everything to C++ in order to
have an executable that works as fast as your old one did. AFAIK, that's
the only language .NET supports unmanaged code in, and many VB programmers
will have neither the knowledge or time to go that route.

invalid because the reason X is faster in first place is because of a
well honed implementation of the required library/interface.

Why is it invalid to expect that something that worked excellently in VB6
will slow by a factor of 50% or more (often significantly more) in what's
supposed to be an "upgrade" of that language?

With .NET microsoft has broken
compatibility with older VB and added performance hits to older COM
software.

That was a two-liner that I posted; I wasn't trying to re-hash every
argument that has ever been made in this debate, just a broad overview of
statements already made previously in the discussion.



Rob


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: C# and my indispensable inline assembly code
    ... the embedding of assembly language would render the assembly (and the ... into unmanaged code and thus cannot control it's type safety or lifetime. ... Read my CLR blog http://samgentile.com/blog/ ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp)
  • Re: The Demise of C#
    ... language but the choice of language is not always up to the programmer. ... I accept that sometimes unmanaged code is needed, ... > use the machine shop to build a custom part. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.aspnet)
  • C# and C++ (again)
    ... examples I was finding used VB.NET, so that's what I picked as a language. ... with better syntax for the kinds of things that .NET does but fundamentally ... using (which I guess would all be managed code) and there is nothing that I ... am doing that requires unmanaged code. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp)
  • Re: The Object Pascal Language standard
    ... A LINQ-like framework and language syntax could be provided by an unmanaged Pascal language (with substantial RTL support being required, that already exists "for freee" on .NET, yes). ... only language feature that would not be portable to unmanaged code, really is the concept of "unsafe code". ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)
  • Re: Is C# really better than VB 2005
    ... make it a somewhat stronger language. ... VB.Net CANNOT write unmanaged code, and most of the advanced books on .Net ... If you are happy with RAD development and don;t really have a use for hard ... does not make any difference which language you use. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.general)