C# developers going back to vb.net

[Kevin]

I don't know if I should even start this topic but here goes.
I'm an ex vb6 developer, now developing in C#.
The reason why I started developing in C# is because the company that I
worked for at the time standarised on C#.

Many of my friends working in previous companies that I worked for are
starting to move back to VB.Net. When I asked them why, it seems that
the next release of VB.Net seems very promising and they kinda see
themselves in the same position I'm in. It seems that at the time when
..Net was first released many companies basically forced developers to
work in C# because as in my case the company they worked for
standarised on C#, why these companies did this is beyond me because
most of their developers were vb developers, I think it's because it
was marketed that C# was the main language to use on the .Net
Framework.

Now many companies as well as management in these companies are
starting to realise that vb.net is not that different from c# and are
starting to give their developers a choice and thus obviously the move
back to vb.

The reason why I'm posting this topic here is because I'm wondering how
many developers using c# are ex vb developers and would actually like
to develop in vb.net. I have actually convinced my superiors to use
vb.net as another language choice and they have agreed.

We have just started a new project in vb.net about 3 mths ago and I
must say that it's still a damn fun language to work in, I'm actually
enjoying my work again. Productivity couldn't be higher as other c# (ex
vb6) developers in my department have also wanted to go back.

Wondering how many of you out there would like to move back to the
lighter side of life?

[Kevin Spencer]

My point was that I never made a qualitative ("best", for example) statement
about either language.

The fact that anyone PERCEIVED a qualitative statement says more about them
than it does about me.

John is 5 foot 9 inches tall.
Sally is 6 foot 1 inch tall.
I am 5 foot 10 inches tall.
I prefer to hang out with John. I don't feel comfortable around women who
are taller than I am.

Which one did I say was "best?"

We are all supposed to be programmers here. That means that we make our
living by logic. When we employ logic badly, we write bad code. The above is
a simple allegory for the statements I made. A logical analysis of those
statements leads to no conclusion regarding the quality of John, or the
quality of Sally. My qualitative impression of the 2 people was not
discussed. Only a single property of both people, which both people have, in
different amounts, was discussed. Their height was discussed because it is
based on their height, and my personal preferences, that I prefer to hang
out with John. In other words, if asked who I would rather hang out with, I
would say "John," and if asked to explain why, I would say "because I don't
feel comfortable around women who are taller than I am."

Now, someone with a particular axe to grind, could (illogically) come to the
conclusion that I am a sexist, or that I prefer the company of men, or that
I have a phobia of women who are larger than I am, or that I am a
homosexual. Would any of these assertions be true? Logically, it is
impossible to say, based on a logical analysis of the statements made.
Therefore, those assertions would be unreliable, and if held by someone who
makes their living by logic, would indicate a certain weakness in their
skill set. It would imply a greater probability that the person making the
assertion was likely to write bad code. In other words, it would provide
more information about the person who made the assertion; it would provide
no information about me.

Or, as my Uncle Chutney sez, "Ambiguity has a certain quality to it."

--

;-),

Kevin Spencer
Microsoft MVP
..Net Developer
Big things are made up of
lots of little things.

"Cor Ligthert [MVP]" <no************ @planet.nl> wrote in message
news:ug******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP14.phx.gbl...

Kevin,

Some people say that the president of the US is the best and others say it
is the one from France and probably even more people have a very other
opinion about that.

(Which proofs by the way nothing about which one is the best)

:-)

Cor
"Kevin Spencer" <ke***@DIESPAMM ERSDIEtakempis. com> schreef in bericht
news:On******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP10.phx.gbl...

Kevin - You like to do the comparison thing, and this is good, but lets
forget about the comparison for a moment, why do you really work in C#,
is it the money or the syntax or were you forced to work in it.

I thought I pretty well explained why I work in C#. It does what I need
it to do. VB does not. I sometimes need pointers, and unsafe code in the
apps I work on. There are other reasons as well. It is concise. It looks
more like what is actually going on in the computer (math). And I love
programming power. I love to know what's going on deep in the bowels of
my app, and I love to make it more efficient, fast, and well-architected.
I will program until the day I die. I don't do it for a living. I do it
for the love of programming. I happen to make a very good living out of
it, but when I no longer need the money, I will continue to do it. I
often program just for "fun." I love to learn. So, I want the biggest
programming "bang" for my buck, the language which gives me the most
options, the greatest programming power. With C#, you can go about as low
as you need or want to. With VB you cannot. Note that I am not saying
this is what everyone "should" do, nor do I claim that it is somehow a
"better" language; it is merely what I prefer because I am what I am.
Different strokes for different folks. Again, I thought I made that
clear. But people hear what they want to hear, and that is their choice.
As for me, I want to hear what is true, and not try to fill in the blanks
with my own skewed perspective of things. And that is one of the things I
love about computers. They are incapable of interpreting, and therefore
incapable of misinterpreting . They are, therefore, reliable, and
"brutally" honest.

And what about the crap statement about vb.net developers not being
ambitious.

Again, I thought I made that point clear. There are different kinds of
ambitions. Some of us aspire to be rich. Some aspire to be loved. Some
aspire to be feared. I simply aspire to be the best programmer I can be,
and that is my ambition. In the context of programming, settling for less
than the most possible capabilities in a programming language is not
ambitious, any more than in the context of wanting to be loved, one can
be said to be ambitious if one settles for merely being well-liked. I
tried to put the statement into context. Perhaps I was ambiguous. I hope
I have sufficiently clarified my remark.

Leon - Hit the nail on the head. It's very much a culture thing. Why is
it then that ex vb developers work in C#.

Culture is important to some. But I seem to recall you saying the
following:

The question was basically 'Have you followed like sheep' or 'Have done
what you want to do'

Personally, I hope I have made it clear that I feel the way I do, not
because of any cultural or peer pressure, but simply because I am what I
am, and C# is the logical choice for someone like myself. My Uncle
Chutney has a saying: "Neither a follower nor a lender be." I have
aspired to live up to that concept. You, on the other hand, it seems,
came here asking for the opinions of others. Doesn't that indicate a
certain interest in those opinions? And why would one be interested in
the opinions of others if one cared not what others thought?

How many of you will go against the grain, because of what you love not
because of what you were told to love???

I for one will not be dicatated to any longer by someone who has no
idea about software development or why we started coding in the first
place.

Good for you. Perhaps a good start would be to stop caring about and
soliciting the opinions of others in the culture you seem to want to
defy.

--
HTH,

Kevin Spencer
Microsoft MVP
.Net Developer
Big things are made up of
lots of little things.

"Kevin" <ke***@inatrice .co.za> wrote in message
news:11******** **************@ g14g2000cwa.goo glegroups.com.. .

I think most of you guys have missed the topic totally, whenever this
question is asked it turns into a language comparison.
It has been proven that every great man in history has stood up in the
middle of the crowd so to speak and has gone against the grain and has
followed his heart.

The question was basically 'Have you followed like sheep' or 'Have done
what you want to do'
How many of you out there are man enough to stand up and forget about
the money, forget about the 'I work in C# because I'm regarded as a
real developer' or 'I work in C# because I'm embarrased to say I work
in vb' and work in the language that you love to work in.

Mythran, Roger, Nikki, William have posted good comments, something
along the line as 'I work in C# because I like the C style syntax
because I worked in C/C++ before'.

Kevin - You like to do the comparison thing, and this is good, but lets
forget about the comparison for a moment, why do you really work in C#,
is it the money or the syntax or were you forced to work in it.

Reginald - If you want to be a more rad type of guy then work in vb.
Are you indicating that c# isn't a rad tool. I think c# is just as rad
as vb.net.

Leon - Hit the nail on the head. It's very much a culture thing. Why is
it then that ex vb developers work in C#.

For myself I've worked in C# for 4 years now. I'm an ex vb developer.
Since I've started this project on VB.Net I actually wake up earlier in
the morning to get to work earlier as to write the next piece of code.
I started developing not because of the money nor the fact that I
thought I would become the best developer in the world but because I
liked software development and the language I wrote it in. I love to
change peoples lives.

I'm afraid to say that most ex vb developers use C# because they are
C++ wannabies not because they can change the world.

And what about the crap statement about vb.net developers not being
ambitious.

We all know that the languages are different and you can do this in one
and that in the other. If I'm missing something I need in vb I'll pop
over to c# and write it, or visa versa.

How many men are out there. (Includes the girls as well, just a figure
of speech)????
How many of you will go against the grain, because of what you love not
because of what you were told to love???

I for one will not be dicatated to any longer by someone who has no
idea about software development or why we started coding in the first
place.

[Cor Ligthert [MVP]]

Kevin,

Most is agreed by me, however you wrote this.

That means that we make our living by logic.

Logic can be subjective (as you showed), in the way we are handling it here
it has to be in my opinion objective.

Which means that when a choose is because of subject reasons, those reasons
have to be added and be in relation to the object.

(When you are in Holland you will probably be comfortable with woman as
Sally, a lot of nice looking woman here are that tall and you will not
recognize it, so even that subjective part can be important)

:-)

Just my opinion.

Cor

[Kevin Spencer]

Thanks Kevin, for understanding.

Actually, I prefer C# over C++. I find the syntax more elegant. It enhances
my productivity. And if I need any unsafe code, I can easily switch to C,
which was my first language, long ago.

C++ is an older implementation/derivation of C. It was designed for very
low-level access, BIOS/processor-level access, in fact. It was developed
prior to the advent of multi-tasking networked operating systems, and before
it was possible to get yourself into too much trouble with
BIOS/processor-level access. And, as computers advanced in capability and
complexity, as multi-tasking operating systems became standard, and the
Internet made almost everything require some sort of TCP network component,
OS's and programs became even more complex, and problems began to emerge.
Among these were memory leaks, due to allocated memory being overlooked and
never de-allocated, and problems with using memory that the operating system
didn't want to be used. And others as well, including file system conflicts,
etc. In other words, another level, or platform, above the operating system,
was a good idea. Whereas BIOS-level programming was fine when operating
systems did little but manage files, OS-level programming makes sense today.

The .Net platform is the best OS-level programming platform to be created to
date. Period. It is natively multi-threaded, and fully object-oriented, all
the way down to primitive data types, via boxing and unboxing. It uses
Garbage Collection to prevent memory leaks, and tends to discourage access
below the OS level. And the C# language was created along the same lines,
with the same syntax principles employed in the development of the C
language, and the C++ language after it. In other words, it is designed for,
and best-suited for the .Net platform, an environment which uses pointers
(under the hood) for everything, and direct member access is largely a thing
of the past.

Therefore, IMHO, the C# language is the best implementation/derivation of C
to come along. It is current, whereas C++ is not. C++ was designed for a
certain programming environment which simply doesn't exist in the .Net
platform, an environment which will eventually be for the most part
forgotten, just as punch cards are only occasionally and wistfully
remembered over a glass of beer these days.

The .Net implementation of C++ is NOT the original C++, although it
certainly looks a lot like it. I believe it was created to accomodate
programmers who have gotten used to the C++ syntax over many years, just as
VB.Net was created to accomodate programmers who have gotten used to VB over
many years. But C# was created as a new implementation of C, and designed
specifically with the .Net platform in mind, and according to the same
syntactical logic that was used to create C and C++. In other words, I feel
that C# is the "native" .Net language.

So, that's my story and I'm stickin' to it!

--
;-),

Kevin Spencer
Microsoft MVP
..Net Developer
Big things are made up of
lots of little things.
"Kevin" <ke***@inatrice .co.za> wrote in message
news:11******** **************@ g47g2000cwa.goo glegroups.com.. .

Brilliant Kevin,

Someone has finally stood up.

I can see you really look for real programming power.
You have obviously looked at C++\CLI by now, my guess is
you would probably be moving over to that very soon.

Congrats.

[Cor Ligthert [MVP]]

Kevin,

In other words, I feel that C# is the "native" .Net language.

About religions you can not discuss, you believe or you don't.

:-)

Cor

[Larry Lard]

Kevin Spencer wrote:
[snip]

C++ is an older implementation/derivation of C. It was designed for very
low-level access, BIOS/processor-level access, in fact. It was developed
prior to the advent of multi-tasking networked operating systems, and before
it was possible to get yourself into too much trouble with
BIOS/processor-level access.

Thanks for reassuring me that I don't have to set too much store by
things you say.

--
Larry Lard
Replies to group please

[Chuck Wagner]

"Cor Ligthert [MVP]" wrote:

Are you serious, you have cut off the boxer his arms and legs to make him
equal to the cripple and now you found that the boxer is not a better
fighter than the cripple.

(Not telling with this, that C# is a cripple)

Really strange how some people react on these C# / VBNet questions in this
newsgroup, it is for me in a way if they are not sure and want to proof
themselves that there choose was right.

I'm not sure what you mean by the boxer & cripple analogy. I don't find that
vb.net is a cripple compared to vb6 if that's what you're suggesting. Having
full featured object orientation in vb.net seems to me that it's a huge
improvement.

The feature that I find makes VB.net development a better experience than C#
is the background compilation and detection of errors while coding. But
that's an artifact of the IDE, not the language, and I think that many people
inappropriately argue over this issue as a language issue.

I've developed VB apps since version 3. During that time I also mastered
C++ with MFC and hated it compared to the simplicity of VB. But now that I
have two languages that're identical in features, for me the decision is
entirely based on the elegance and conciseness of the language. And C# wins
at being more concise.

[Cor Ligthert [MVP]]

I'm not sure what you mean by the boxer & cripple analogy. I don't find
that
vb.net is a cripple compared to vb6 if that's what you're suggesting.
This is from your message, I quoted it only partially.
Interestingly enough, I have to develop simultaneously in both c# and
vb.net, and I'd like to eliminate the vb.net stuff.

I understood from that, that you use in VBNet only parts that are as well in
C#, because the second sentence was direct behind "vb.net".

(Not using the microsoft.visua lbasic namespace by instance).

Don't think that I have anything against C# by the way. I don't like not
honest comparing.

Cor

[Kevin]

Kevin,

One more question, have you ever worked in Visual Basic?
I realised by your reply that you are a very 'c' orientated developer,
you must have been very excited when c# hit the market, this is why I
asked the question whether or not you will be using C++\CLI in the
future. This will give you even more power like deterministic
finalization for instance.

[Kevin]

Yes, I agree with your statement, but the point I am trying to make is
if people like apples why do they pretend to like oranges because the
majority like oranges and actually they are dying for a nice juicy
apple.
I was actually complimenting you on your response because you were one
of the people who said I like c# because of this and that, not because
it has better features than another language. Also it's difficult to
believe people sometimes because it's in our nature to follow the
majority. I find the psycology behind it very interesting, this is why
I posted this question in the first place. You can see immediately that
some people jumped on the I like c# because it's better than vb
bandwagon, when there are many languages that are just as feature rich
on the .Net framework.

[Chuck Wagner]

"Cor Ligthert [MVP]" wrote:

I understood from that, that you use in VBNet only parts that are as well in
C#, because the second sentence was direct behind "vb.net".

(Not using the microsoft.visua lbasic namespace by instance).

Don't think that I have anything against C# by the way. I don't like not
honest comparing.

I happen to believe that my comparisons are quite honest - and there's
virtually nothing in the visualbasic namespace that isn't elsewhere in the
framework. So I really don't think of that namespace making vb.net into a
boxer. Yes, there are a few features that are very handy when the need
arises, but those situations are rare, and often I could implement a bit of
code to do it myself just as easily. Even so, when comparing what vb.net has
vs C# when considering the whole framework, they're 99.95% equivalent.

For example, vb.net has the With keyword, which is a handy shorthand when
setting multiple properties on an object. C# has the Using statement which
automatically calls dispose on an object for you. I find that C#'s using
saves me a lot more typing and code than With, but your mileage may vary.

I'm curious about what you think it is that makes vb.net a boxer?