Re: VB or C#

:-) I had to look up YMMV (Your Mileage May Vary) - never seen that acronym
before Tom

I consider E&C to be a core part of VB's RAD claim

Anyway, preferences aside, I also believe MSFT attached too much
significance to E&C when they tried to persuade people to migrate. It wasn't
the killer feature they believed, and they missed the essential point about
why people were holding back, or were grid-locked for want of another
phrase. It wasn't the lack of E&C, or the lack of GoSub, or the learning
curve, or any of the other weak arguments they'd convinced themselves of. It
was the lack of a viable migration bridge - from either camp (i.e. incl. a
possible VB 6.5) - and the commercial realities that that uncovered.

If they'd wanted to, they could have solved this, and without the
disenchantment of the VB community, or the bad press. Even now, it's not too
late for them to address things, but they're not listening to constructive
advice, and the issue has turned into a political damage-control exercise. I
guess they hope the remaining criticisms will just be swept along in the
tide of all the "new technology".

Tony Proctor

"Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1176776029.487446.322220@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Apr 16, 8:23 am, "Tony Proctor"
<tony_proctor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I have to disagree Tom. E&C can be an amazing aid to productivity - so
much
so that I can't imagine being without it now. In the early phases of
trying
to run through some brand new code, from end-to-end without having to
restart everything, it's excellent at helping fix all those glaring
errors
that even the best of us can produce.

OT slightly: I think if we'd all been using an older generation of VB
when
.Net came out, then the rush to convert might have been greater. As it
is,
the original VB development team (that finally produced VB6) did a truly
outstanding job at taking a language with a long and dubious history -
and
not much of a reputation - and creating a slick, robust, and very
productive
language+environment that was still accessible to many
non-professionals.
They actually created something that wasn't provided by any of the other
MSFT languages. Unfortunately, this then made the language a prime
candidate
for cost-effective enterprise development - the sort of development that
most severely felt the thump as the rug was pulled.

Tony Proctor

You of course have the right to disagree - but, I personally find what
you describe is a very poor way to develop code. That is my personal
preference - YMMV.

--
Tom Shelton



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Why do you write poetry?
    ... Use language we can comprehend. ... To stay our minds on and be staid. ... staid when booming voices carry praise or blame too far. ... Tom Heart-at-ease, Tom Navvy: he is all for his meal ...
    (rec.arts.poems)
  • Re: X68-64 buffer overflow exploits and the borrowed code chunks exploitation technique
    ... >> Such a language exists? ... > where the opportunity for making target length related mistakes. ... How hard is it to do checks as you decode fields? ... Tom ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Ping Arlene
    ... > people who are into playing games are usually quite intelligent and quite ... They use language and twist ... Tom is not capable of using language in that way... ... I barely have time to read the posts I WANT to see here, ...
    (rec.music.makers.guitar.acoustic)
  • Re: OS questions
    ... If your really looking for a history lesson that is. ... Also, well stated Tom. ... > solution can be expressed more clearly in that language. ... > a computer language historian alone won't help you finish your software ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.vb)
  • Re: Re: I have a doubt
    ... we lost that right. ... didn't lose any rights whatsoever by so doing. ... YMMV. ... feel that they have the right to call the language they have had to ...
    (comp.lang.c)