Re: Back to VB6 and .NET

"Cor Ligthert[MVP]" <notmyfirstname@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:C0B52161-16F0-42B8-80A6-C19C71D45DC8@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Can you tell me what was already in C# and not in VB for Net (beside the
dead horse unsafe code):

<g>... that "dead horse" is being shoved down our throats, in the form of
"the wonderful world of interop"

From version 2005 VB has Edit and continue ( a feature I don't like, it
cost me to much time)

Because it was an afterthought, hacked into place in a desparate attempt to
grab more VB Classic devs.

Try it in VB5/6. There is *no* noticable time delays between keystrokes.

VB for net has direct from version 2002 background compiling, a feature
that has never been in C# and therefore C# needs endless builds to correct
typing errors.

Which must be another "bolt on - after the fact" because VB Classic's had
that for years.

VB for net has direct from version 2002 a kind of auto editing, something
that has never been in C# (which is much improved in version 2008 by the
way)

Which must be another "bolt on - after the fact" because VB Classic's had
that for years.

VB has in version 2008 direct XML creation something that is not in C#.

Now there's one VB Classic doesn't have.... XML. The "kitchen sink" file
spec that was originally designed to be nothing more than a "treeview"
version of CSV files. If you check the contents of an XML file in notepad,
you'll see the same "bloatware" authors were involved in its creation.

VB has in version 2008 the option Infer, for which in C# is introduced the
var (an other name for Dim) but only for abstract classes.

Cor, imo it's great B#'s been able to grab a few people that'll stick by and
defend it to the end.... which, is what we do here, with VB Classic.

This and 10 thousand similar threads would've never seen the light of day if
MS did the right thing when they released their new language. Can B# do
stuff VB6 can't? Of course... Can VB6 do stuff B# can't? Most likely
(especially if we're talking performance and ease of use). The problem is in
the name. Period. When they released dotNet, there were 24 letters they had
to choose from (26 - C and B). Instead of picking another letter, they
re-used "B" and called their new language VB... the problem is, it does
*NOT* recognize BASIC syntax. Some? Sure.... the simple fact that you can
load VB3 code into VB6 and, if there are no dependencies, simply hit the Run
button, should tell people that B# is *NOT* BASIC.


--
Ken Halter - MS-MVP-VB - Please keep all discussions in the groups..
In Loving Memory - http://www.vbsight.com/Remembrance.htm


.

Loading