ECMA standardization

[Alvin Pruney]

Hi,

Since C# is ECMA draft standard, why isn't VB.NET going for
standardisation also? Is this because like VB6, it is a closed language and
propriarty? VB6 will be ending in a few years officially (according to
support.microsoft.com information), no good business reason to use a
propriety language when a standard managed language exists.

Is VB.NET ever going for ECMA standardization?

Thanks

[Eric Gunnerson [MS]]

I think you should ask that question on languages.vb

--
Eric Gunnerson

Visit the C# product team at http://www.csharp.net
Eric's blog is at http://blogs.gotdotnet.com/ericgu/

This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
"Alvin Pruney" <.> wrote in message
news:Oo*************@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...

Hi,

Since C# is ECMA draft standard, why isn't VB.NET going for
standardisation also? Is this because like VB6, it is a closed language and propriarty? VB6 will be ending in a few years officially (according to
support.microsoft.com information), no good business reason to use a
propriety language when a standard managed language exists.

Is VB.NET ever going for ECMA standardization?

Thanks

[Michael Giagnocavo [MVP]]

> support.microsoft.com information), no good business reason to use a

propriety language when a standard managed language exists.

Tell that to businesses with 100,000+ lines of VB code and programmers who
like VB.

-mike
MVP

Tell that to the thousands that are now using C# (standardized) to replace
VB on new projects
"Michael Giagnocavo [MVP]" <mg*******@Atrevido.net> wrote in message
news:O2**************@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...

support.microsoft.com information), no good business reason to use a
propriety language when a standard managed language exists.

Tell that to businesses with 100,000+ lines of VB code and programmers who
like VB.

-mike
MVP

Now we have an alternative to VB thats standard, why should we use a non
standard propriety language for new projects? No reason at all.
"Michael Giagnocavo [MVP]" <mg*******@Atrevido.net> wrote in message
news:O2**************@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...

support.microsoft.com information), no good business reason to use a
propriety language when a standard managed language exists.

Tell that to businesses with 100,000+ lines of VB code and programmers who
like VB.

-mike
MVP

No business sense to use a propriety language when there is now a real
alternative thats standard. Actually for new projects its business suicide
to get tied in.
<di********@discussion.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:Oc**************@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...

Now we have an alternative to VB thats standard, why should we use a non
standard propriety language for new projects? No reason at all.
"Michael Giagnocavo [MVP]" <mg*******@Atrevido.net> wrote in message
news:O2**************@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...

support.microsoft.com information), no good business reason to use a
propriety language when a standard managed language exists.

Tell that to businesses with 100,000+ lines of VB code and programmers who like VB.

-mike
MVP

[Michael Giagnocavo [MVP]]

Um, sure. VB's been proprietary, and there have been "standard" languages
around. Some companies chose C, some chose VB. I don't see how anything
has to do with standardization. Anyways, like Eric suggested, go post in a
VB forum.

-mike
MVP

<di********@discussion.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:uq**************@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...

Tell that to the thousands that are now using C# (standardized) to replace
VB on new projects
"Michael Giagnocavo [MVP]" <mg*******@Atrevido.net> wrote in message
news:O2**************@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...

support.microsoft.com information), no good business reason to use a
propriety language when a standard managed language exists.

Tell that to businesses with 100,000+ lines of VB code and programmers who like VB.

-mike
MVP