Beating a dead Horse: Which Language

"WJ" <Jo*******@HotMail.Com> schrieb:

but everyone I come in contact with prefer C# over VB.net

Correction needed: In .Net, c-sharp is written as c#, not C#. C# is a
musical symbol, it denotes Do Major (in Italian), in English, it is a C
Major !
Now, this case-sensitive thing alone will drive a novice crazy!

It's actually "C#", 'Visual Basic .NET" ("VB.NET") and ".NET".

--
M S Herfried K. Wagner
M V P <URL:http://dotnet.mvps.org/>
V B <URL:http://classicvb.org/petition/>

Nov 21 '05 #14

Morten Wennevik

Hi,

Seeing as noone seems to have touched the issues I find important ...

If you have no background in C/C++/Java or similar you may find VB.NET easier to understand simply because it has less symbols and more logical words. If you have dabbled in C/C++/Java or similar you may find C# to be easier to do.

There are no real performance differences between C# and VB.NET. With a few minor exceptions they are each capable of doing the same things.

As Malik said, what takes time is learning to know the framework, which is identical for all .NET languages. If you read the questions in these groups you will find that the answers in many cases are language independent, valid for both C# and VB.NET. And in those cases that it is language dependent, translating it to the other language is a simple task.

Go with what you prefer, either is fine.
--
Happy coding!
Morten Wennevik [C# MVP]

Nov 21 '05 #15

DraguVaso

I have the same opinion: C# en VB.NET are really close. It just depends on
preferences.
I used to work in VB6, so VB.NET seemed the most logic thing to me. but if
you know VB.NET, you automaticly can work in C# too: it's the same syntax,
they just put it a little bit otherwise on the form, like this:
- VB.NET: "I am a programmer"
- C#: "{A programmer I am}"
One of the things I really dislike about C# is the fact that you have to put
al those {}{}{}{} :-)

"Morten Wennevik" <Mo************@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:op.ss2hf2vzklbvpo@stone...

Hi,

Seeing as noone seems to have touched the issues I find important ...

If you have no background in C/C++/Java or similar you may find VB.NET easier to understand simply because it has less symbols and more logical
words. If you have dabbled in C/C++/Java or similar you may find C# to be
easier to do.
There are no real performance differences between C# and VB.NET. With a few minor exceptions they are each capable of doing the same things.
As Malik said, what takes time is learning to know the framework, which is identical for all .NET languages. If you read the questions in these groups
you will find that the answers in many cases are language independent, valid
for both C# and VB.NET. And in those cases that it is language dependent,
translating it to the other language is a simple task.
Go with what you prefer, either is fine.
--
Happy coding!
Morten Wennevik [C# MVP]

Nov 21 '05 #16

"Herfried K. Wagner [MVP]" <hi***************@gmx.at> escribió en el mensaje
news:%2****************@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...

It's actually "C#", 'Visual Basic .NET" ("VB.NET") and ".NET".

"Visual C#" ;-)

http://msdn.microsoft.com/vcsharp/
--
Best regards,

Carlos J. Quintero

MZ-Tools: Productivity add-ins for Visual Studio .NET, VB6, VB5 and VBA
You can code, design and document much faster.
Free resources for add-in developers:
http://www.mztools.com

Nov 21 '05 #17

I agree on this. Languages are only a thin "layer" to learn on top of the
..NET Framework beast.
--
Best regards,

Carlos J. Quintero

MZ-Tools: Productivity add-ins for Visual Studio .NET, VB6, VB5 and VBA
You can code, design and document much faster.
Free resources for add-in developers:
http://www.mztools.com
"Sahil Malik [MVP]" <co*****************@nospam.com> escribió en el mensaje
news:Oz**************@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...

Do both.

Learn the framework and learn both languages. Then become polished in
whichever the first project is on - that is what you will get most
practise with anyway.

- Sahil Malik [MVP]

Nov 21 '05 #18

Mark Rae

"WJ" <Jo*******@HotMail.Com> wrote in message
news:O1**************@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...

Correction needed: In .Net, c-sharp is written as c#, not C#. C# is a
musical symbol, it denotes Do Major (in Italian), in English, it is a C
Major !

No it isn't - C# is the black note between C natural and D natural.

Nov 21 '05 #19

Hi,

I have seen a lot of discussion about this. Only one guy impressed me with
what and how he wrote about this subject.

http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...cce63bb7?hl=en

I hope this gives an idea.

Cor

Nov 21 '05 #20

Sam Jost

put some c# source and some vb.net source side by side, have a good
look at them and choose the one where you like the look of the source
better.

(I was going to say 'flip a coin', but you wanted logic, and logic
tells me it would be better to work with the language you like the
looks of) :)

Sam

cf***********@yahoo.com schrieb:

Hi,

I know that I'm an extreme newb by asking this overly beaten question,
but I am leaning toward C#, becuase the perception is that it is better
to learn than VB.Net. I guess it makes you cooler.:-)

Anyhow, I am a novice programmer, and I will remain one as well...I have
no plans to make programming my life ambition, but I think that it would
be fun to make my databases do some cool tricks and maybe write a
simplistic client to access the database over the LAN, and by internet
as well. My programing will be centered around Data manipulation, i.e.
collecting, sorting, and reporting on this data to myself.....

I want to know which language you find most compelling to accomplish my
mission. It may be that it doesn't have anything at all to do with the
language, from my understanding they are close to equal, but everyone I
come in contact with prefer C# over VB.net
Please, NO FLAMES; just logic
Thank you in advance!

Nov 21 '05 #21

Massimo

"WJ" <Jo*******@HotMail.Com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:uP**************@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...

I don't know why you named Italy,
I love Italy !

Me too, I live here ;-)
The country is beaufitul, but the people... well... if you're a tourist
they're ok, but if you're trying to ever accomplish *anything*, this is
absolutely not the best place :-/
This is especially true for IT jobs... IT here was ruined by legions of
wanna-be programmers, technicians and sysadmins who bought "computer
programming for dummies" (or things like that) and then tried to get a job,
and stupid companies managed by people who don't even know what a computer
is but think they can get rich with them.
On top of that, I am a Roman Catholic.
This always seemed strange to me... I can go to st. Peter's in 15 minutes,
and there are people from all over the world who only saw it in pictures
:-)))
Though I never realized that there are that many VBs overthere
until you said so! So ignorance I am !

Yes, there are... and many of them are as I described above. If you saw a
RecordSet being used by one of them as I saw one, you would have wept over
that poor RecordSet's tragic fate :-(

Massimo

Nov 21 '05 #22

Massimo

"WJ" <Jo*******@HotMail.Com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:uP**************@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...

I don't know why you named Italy,

I love Italy ! On top of that, I am a Roman Catholic . Though I never
realized that there are that many VBs overthere until you said so! So
ignorance I am !

By the way: I prefer C#, but it's only a syntax thing.
I never used VB (altough I know something about it), but used C, C++ and
Java extensively... and I definitely prefer { and } over BEGIN and END.
Massimo

Nov 21 '05 #23

Massimo,
... and I definitely prefer { and } over BEGIN and END.

That was what I too was always thinking.

I see now large benefits from the seperated kinds of begin and ends in
Visual Basic.

A nested procedure 6 deep with only {} do I find already almost a crime.

In VBNet I have not seen the maximum of that and it stays still stays
readable.

Just my thought about this

Cor

Nov 21 '05 #24

Paul Clement

On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 00:37:51 GMT, cf***********@yahoo.com wrote:
¤ I want to know which language you find most compelling to accomplish my
¤ mission. It may be that it doesn't have anything at all to do with the
¤ language, from my understanding they are close to equal, but everyone I
¤ come in contact with prefer C# over VB.net
¤

What did they say when you asked them why?
Paul
~~~~
Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)

Nov 21 '05 #25

Carlos,

"Carlos J. Quintero [.NET MVP]" <ca*****@NOSPAMsogecable.com> schrieb:

It's actually "C#", 'Visual Basic .NET" ("VB.NET") and ".NET".

"Visual C#" ;-)

http://msdn.microsoft.com/vcsharp/

Visual C# is Microsoft's product. The language's name accoding to the ECMA
specification is C#:

<URL:http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/standards/Ecma-334.htm>

--
M S Herfried K. Wagner
M V P <URL:http://dotnet.mvps.org/>
V B <URL:http://classicvb.org/petition/>

Nov 21 '05 #26

David Anton

Obviously, the best solution is to use both languages (and J# also) and then
buy our converters to switch between them as often as possible.
;)

David Anton
www.tangiblesoftwaresolutions.com
Home of:
Instant C#: VB.NET to C# Converter
Instant VB: C# to VB.NET Converter
Instant J#: VB.NET to J# Converter

"cf***********@yahoo.com" wrote:

Hi,

I know that I'm an extreme newb by asking this overly beaten question,
but I am leaning toward C#, becuase the perception is that it is better
to learn than VB.Net. I guess it makes you cooler.:-)

Anyhow, I am a novice programmer, and I will remain one as well...I have
no plans to make programming my life ambition, but I think that it would
be fun to make my databases do some cool tricks and maybe write a
simplistic client to access the database over the LAN, and by internet
as well. My programing will be centered around Data manipulation, i.e.
collecting, sorting, and reporting on this data to myself.....

I want to know which language you find most compelling to accomplish my
mission. It may be that it doesn't have anything at all to do with the
language, from my understanding they are close to equal, but everyone I
come in contact with prefer C# over VB.net
Please, NO FLAMES; just logic
Thank you in advance!

Nov 21 '05 #27

Yes, yes, I know, although my impression is that nobody uses the term
"Visual C#"...

--
Best regards,

Carlos J. Quintero

MZ-Tools: Productivity add-ins for Visual Studio .NET, VB6, VB5 and VBA
You can code, design and document much faster.
Free resources for add-in developers:
http://www.mztools.com

"Herfried K. Wagner [MVP]" <hi***************@gmx.at> escribió en el mensaje
news:OT**************@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...

Visual C# is Microsoft's product. The language's name accoding to the
ECMA specification is C#:

<URL:http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/standards/Ecma-334.htm>

Nov 21 '05 #28

Elliot M. Rodriguez

As a programmer in both, more VB.NET than Visual C#, I will echo some of
the sentiments and share my own.

Being that you are a novice programmer, it may be easier and faster for
you to start with VB.NET as opposed to C#. This curve is a bit dependent
on what tools you are using to learn with.

C#'s case dependence, bracketing, and lack of real human readable
keywords and syntax may make the transition a little longer than with
VB. The case issue was fixed in Whidbey with better Intellisense, so
this may not be an issue for you anymore... but there is something to be
said for being able to decipher how code blocks work when you are
looking at something like:

for Counter as integer = 0 to MyCollection.Count
....
next

versus

for (int Counter = 0; Counter < MyCollection.Count; Counter++)
{
}

It is less verbose, but does not convey terribly clearly what is happening.

That having been said... I can say that my usage of C# with VB.NET has
made me a much better programmer overall. Why? Because C# forces you in
some degree to pay attention to concise, clear code. This translates
well into VB.NET, despite the somewhat more verbose syntax.

Lastly, while totally undeserved, there is something to be said in the
community about being able to program in C# than VB.NET. I think part of
this is Microsoft's fault (I wont change the thread here by launching
into my reasons why I believe this), part is from the general perception
since the early VB days of it being a "toy" language.

My 2 cents, thrown in with the rest of the group.
Morten Wennevik wrote:

Hi,

Seeing as noone seems to have touched the issues I find important ...

If you have no background in C/C++/Java or similar you may find VB.NET
easier to understand simply because it has less symbols and more logical
words. If you have dabbled in C/C++/Java or similar you may find C# to
be easier to do.

There are no real performance differences between C# and VB.NET. With a
few minor exceptions they are each capable of doing the same things.

As Malik said, what takes time is learning to know the framework, which
is identical for all .NET languages. If you read the questions in these
groups you will find that the answers in many cases are language
independent, valid for both C# and VB.NET. And in those cases that it
is language dependent, translating it to the other language is a simple
task.

Go with what you prefer, either is fine.

Nov 21 '05 #29

> Obviously, the best solution is to use both languages (and J# also) and

then
buy our converters to switch between them as often as possible.
;)

LOL

Nov 21 '05 #30

"Carlos J. Quintero [.NET MVP]" <ca*****@NOSPAMsogecable.com> schrieb:

Yes, yes, I know, although my impression is that nobody uses the term
"Visual C#"...

ACK! And /really nobody/ uses the plain term "Basic" when talking about
Visual Basic .NET, except Microsoft in the VS.NET IDE properties dialog ;-).

--
M S Herfried K. Wagner
M V P <URL:http://dotnet.mvps.org/>
V B <URL:http://classicvb.org/petition/>

Nov 21 '05 #31

William \(Bill\) Vaughn

The programming language that's best for you is a function of where you come
from. As Morten so clearly said, if you come from the OO-style languages C#
will be more comfortable but there's also Managed C++ for those folks and J#
as well. VB.NET was originally designed to help VB6 developers transition to
..NET. That's because at the time almost 80% of developers used VB6. It has
evolved over time (and is still evolving) to help developer productivity.
You'll find more differences in the Visual Studio.NET IDE than anywhere
else. In the current versions (and more so in older versions) C# required
you to constantly rebuild your project to resolve addressing. C# is always
going to be case sensitive (which is a royal PITA) and pretty anal. Newer
versions of C# have included on-the-fly compilation (finally) and
edit-and-continue (unless they dropped it again)--but so does VB.NET (which
always did on-the-fly compilation). VB.NET also has a new "My" namespace to
vastly simplify some of the more convoluted framework references. But again,
they build virtually identical IL.

--
____________________________________
William (Bill) Vaughn
Author, Mentor, Consultant
Microsoft MVP
www.betav.com/blog/billva
www.betav.com
Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
__________________________________

"Morten Wennevik" <Mo************@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:op.ss2hf2vzklbvpo@stone...

Hi,

Seeing as noone seems to have touched the issues I find important ...

If you have no background in C/C++/Java or similar you may find VB.NET
easier to understand simply because it has less symbols and more logical
words. If you have dabbled in C/C++/Java or similar you may find C# to be
easier to do.

There are no real performance differences between C# and VB.NET. With a
few minor exceptions they are each capable of doing the same things.

As Malik said, what takes time is learning to know the framework, which is
identical for all .NET languages. If you read the questions in these
groups you will find that the answers in many cases are language
independent, valid for both C# and VB.NET. And in those cases that it is
language dependent, translating it to the other language is a simple task.

Go with what you prefer, either is fine.
--
Happy coding!
Morten Wennevik [C# MVP]

Nov 21 '05 #32

William \(Bill\) Vaughn

Yes, sure it is. Go back to your piano and let us get some work done.

--
____________________________________
William (Bill) Vaughn
Author, Mentor, Consultant
Microsoft MVP
www.betav.com/blog/billva
www.betav.com
Please reply only to the newsgroup so that others can benefit.
This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.
__________________________________

"Mark Rae" <ma**@mark-N-O-S-P-A-M-rae.co.uk> wrote in message
news:eb**************@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...

"WJ" <Jo*******@HotMail.Com> wrote in message
news:O1**************@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
Correction needed: In .Net, c-sharp is written as c#, not C#. C# is a
musical symbol, it denotes Do Major (in Italian), in English, it is a C
Major !

No it isn't - C# is the black note between C natural and D natural.

Nov 21 '05 #33

Massimo

"Cor Ligthert" <no************@planet.nl> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:eo**************@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...

A nested procedure 6 deep with only {} do I find already almost a crime.

A nested procedure with six depth levels is a crime anyway :-)

Massimo

Nov 21 '05 #34

Reginald Blue

cf***********@yahoo.com wrote:

Anyhow, I am a novice programmer, and I will remain one as well...I
have no plans to make programming my life ambition, but I think that
it would be fun to make my databases do some cool tricks and maybe
write a simplistic client to access the database over the LAN, and by
internet as well. My programing will be centered around Data
manipulation, i.e. collecting, sorting, and reporting on this data to
myself.....

I want to know which language you find most compelling to accomplish
my mission. It may be that it doesn't have anything at all to do with
the language, from my understanding they are close to equal, but
everyone I come in contact with prefer C# over VB.net

The one thing that hasn't been mentioned, that I saw, is the direction that
Microsoft is pushing the languages towards in 2.0. The last time I went to
a presentation on this, which was a while ago, each language had been given
a particular focus.

The focus for VB.Net in 2.0 was to be the rapid application development
platform. They include the My.* heirarchy to allow for quick access to
various items... basically instant help. I believe that it also had
slightly better support, in the development UI, for developing forms, but I
could be misremembering.

The focus for C# was on back end business processing. As such it came with
facilities for assisting coding with standard Gang of Four patterns and the
ability to refactor code quite easily.

The focus for Managed C++ was for 'down and dirty' close to the framework,
fast as possible, type work.

Based on what you've said above, sounds like C# in 2.0 is better suited for
your likes and dislikes. But that's just a guess. And my recollection of
things may be off, as well as things may have changed.

--
Reginald Blue
"I have always wished that my computer would be as easy to use as my
telephone. My wish has come true. I no longer know how to use my
telephone."
- Bjarne Stroustrup (originator of C++) [quoted at the 2003
International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces]

Nov 21 '05 #35

"Massimo"

A nested procedure 6 deep with only {} do I find already almost a crime.

A nested procedure with six depth levels is a crime anyway :-)

You wrote that you never tried VBNet. You should try that, you would not
believe your eyes when you see how nice that is arranged by the IDE and how
good readable your programs become by nesting something even 10 or 12 (or
more) deep.

Just my thougth

Cor

Nov 21 '05 #36

Howard Swope

All .Net languages are very similar because they ultimately produce the same
intermediate language and use the same application services. I have only
heard of (never experienced myself) a handful of capabilities in one that
doesn't exist in the other. That being said, each language is syntactically
different and has SUBTLE nuances that would be more appropriate to one
application or another. So if you really want to split hairs that is the
place to look.

You also may want to consider the possibility of if you will ever have to
look at legacy code. You might want the syntax you are familiar with to be
similar to what you are likely to encounter. Is it more likely to be C/C++
or VB?

Most serious commercial software and operating systems are written in C /
C++ with a little assembler thrown in. Other proprietary software written
for business and engineering has been written in dozens of languages,
PASCAL, FORTRAN, COBOL, ADA, SMALL TALK, POWER BUILDER, DELPHI, to name a
few. Most Microsoft applications and technologies that provide for scripting
support VBA (Visual Basic for Applications) a form of VB.

When it comes down to it all languages let you do the same thing, create and
access data structures and control the flow of logic. It will boil down to a
personal preference. For me C / C++ has always been the coolest thing
around. C# is a natural extension of this. It brings a lot of the niceties
of the higher level language to the syntax that is familiar to me. I think
also C# is the favored language of those who created .Net which is always
something to consider. The older you get the harder it is to be cool. You
might as well get it while you can.

<cf***********@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:zZ****************@bignews3.bellsouth.net...

Hi,

I know that I'm an extreme newb by asking this overly beaten question,
but I am leaning toward C#, becuase the perception is that it is better
to learn than VB.Net. I guess it makes you cooler.:-)

Anyhow, I am a novice programmer, and I will remain one as well...I have
no plans to make programming my life ambition, but I think that it would
be fun to make my databases do some cool tricks and maybe write a
simplistic client to access the database over the LAN, and by internet
as well. My programing will be centered around Data manipulation, i.e.
collecting, sorting, and reporting on this data to myself.....

I want to know which language you find most compelling to accomplish my
mission. It may be that it doesn't have anything at all to do with the
language, from my understanding they are close to equal, but everyone I
come in contact with prefer C# over VB.net
Please, NO FLAMES; just logic
Thank you in advance!

Nov 21 '05 #37

Andrew Faust

"Carlos J. Quintero [.NET MVP]" wrote:

I agree on this. Languages are only a thin "layer" to learn on top of the
..NET Framework beast.

I'd go it a step farther and say that programming languages are only a thin
layer on top of programming concepts. Once you get proficient at the
underlying logic of writing code, it becomes merely a matter of a few days to
learn syntax and some good reference books to become functional in a new
language.

Nov 21 '05 #38

I tend to agree with that too, but modern languages (products?) come with
huge frameworks (class libraries) that you need to master too to avoid
reinventing the wheel while programming, so, yes, programming concepts
(structured, object-oriented) are important but class libraries too. So,
finally the syntax is almost irrelevant...

--
Best regards,

Carlos J. Quintero

MZ-Tools: Productivity add-ins for Visual Studio .NET, VB6, VB5 and VBA
You can code, design and document much faster.
Free resources for add-in developers:
http://www.mztools.com

"Andrew Faust" <af****@nospam.nospam> escribió en el mensaje
news:AC**********************************@microsof t.com...

"Carlos J. Quintero [.NET MVP]" wrote:
I'd go it a step farther and say that programming languages are only a
thin
layer on top of programming concepts. Once you get proficient at the
underlying logic of writing code, it becomes merely a matter of a few days
to
learn syntax and some good reference books to become functional in a new
language.

Nov 21 '05 #39

"Carlos J. Quintero [.NET MVP]" <ca*****@NOSPAMsogecable.com> schrieb:

I tend to agree with that too, but modern languages (products?) come with
huge frameworks (class libraries) that you need to master too to avoid
reinventing the wheel while programming, so, yes, programming concepts
(structured, object-oriented) are important but class libraries too. So,
finally the syntax is almost irrelevant...

ACK. However, often programming languages live longer than class
libraries... The stronger a programming language is tied to a certain
framework, the harder it will be to migrate the code to a new framework.

Consider VB's intrinsic functions -- some of these functions exist (with
slight adaptions) since early versions of BASIC and can still be used. I
see these functions as meta-framework which abstracts from the framework
currently used, and thus prefer these functions over corresponding
functionality which is part of the .NET Framework Class Library.

The implication from that is that I believe that programming languages
(syntax and meta-frameworks) are more than "sugar".

Just my two Euro cents...

--
M S Herfried K. Wagner
M V P <URL:http://dotnet.mvps.org/>
V B <URL:http://classicvb.org/petition/>

Nov 21 '05 #40

Herfried,

ACK. However, often programming languages live longer than class
libraries... The stronger a programming language is tied to a certain
framework, the harder it will be to migrate the code to a new framework.

In my opinion is this against all what you have written the last months why
VB classic should be kept alive.

Programming language have the same (however quicker) evolution than natural
languages.

Class librarys have in my opinion to be consistent in there behaviour, even
when it is unwanted behaviour which is not a bug. This to fulfil what you
have written the last months.

Just my 2 eurocents.

Cor

Nov 21 '05 #41

"Herfried K. Wagner [MVP]" <hi***************@gmx.at> escribió en el mensaje
news:%2****************@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...

Consider VB's intrinsic functions -- some of these functions exist (with
slight adaptions) since early versions of BASIC and can still be used. I
see these functions as meta-framework which abstracts from the framework
currently used, and thus prefer these functions over corresponding
functionality which is part of the .NET Framework Class Library.

Interesting, although my view is the opposite: I prefer to use the functions
of the .NET Framework instead of the ones of the early Basic, since the code
is very tied to the .NET Framework anyway. Using the functions of the
framework makes it more easy to migrate to, say C#, or even Java (which uses
a different framework), IMHO.

--
Best regards,

Carlos J. Quintero

MZ-Tools: Productivity add-ins for Visual Studio .NET, VB6, VB5 and VBA
You can code, design and document much faster.
Free resources for add-in developers:
http://www.mztools.com

Nov 21 '05 #42

"Cor Ligthert" <no************@planet.nl> schrieb:

ACK. However, often programming languages live longer than class
libraries... The stronger a programming language is tied to a certain
framework, the harder it will be to migrate the code to a new framework.

In my opinion is this against all what you have written the last months
why VB classic should be kept alive.

The main problem with the Classic VB/VB.NET issue is that the languages are
not code-compatible although they could have been designed to be. That's
another topic which has been discussed several times in newsgroups. Despite
this incompatibility the VB.NET runtime library provides functionality which
is almost compatible with the corresponding functions of earlier BASIC
dialects, which means that some of the knowledge can be reused and code can
theoretically be reused if there were no breaking changes to the syntax like
the loss of support for arbitrary lower bounds of arrays etc.

--
M S Herfried K. Wagner
M V P <URL:http://dotnet.mvps.org/>
V B <URL:http://classicvb.org/petition/>

Nov 21 '05 #43

Massimo

"Cor Ligthert" <no************@planet.nl> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:%2****************@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...

A nested procedure 6 deep with only {} do I find already almost a crime.

A nested procedure with six depth levels is a crime anyway :-)

You wrote that you never tried VBNet. You should try that, you would not
believe your eyes when you see how nice that is arranged by the IDE and
how good readable your programs become by nesting something even 10 or 12
(or more) deep.

I'm not talking about aesthetics here, but about docing; when you've a
procedure with *so much* code and flow control inside, probably it's time to
split it into more smaller ones.

Massimo

Nov 21 '05 #44

"Massimo"

I'm not talking about aesthetics here, but about docing; when you've a
procedure with *so much* code and flow control inside, probably it's time
to split it into more smaller ones.

Did you try VBNet. I agree completly with you when it are C derived
languages.

As I said, try it, and than tell your expirience after that. Now your answer
looks for me like somebody who tells that he/she never played footbal (there
was something else before), however talks about if he/she is an expert in
it.

Cor

Nov 21 '05 #45

"Massimo" <ba****@mclink.it> schrieb:

A nested procedure 6 deep with only {} do I find already almost a
crime.

A nested procedure with six depth levels is a crime anyway :-)

You wrote that you never tried VBNet. You should try that, you would not
believe your eyes when you see how nice that is arranged by the IDE and
how good readable your programs become by nesting something even 10 or 12
(or more) deep.

I'm not talking about aesthetics here, but about docing; when you've a
procedure with *so much* code and flow control inside, probably it's time
to split it into more smaller ones.

The problem are not only blocks inside methods. Imagine an explicit
namespace definition with class definitions, nested classes, properties and
only a single additional 'if' block inside the property's getter. This
leads to six closing brackets. When implementing a complex algorithm it
gets even worse (up to ten nesting levels in total).

\\\
namespace Foo
{
public class Goo
{
public class Bar
{
public string Name
{
get
{
if (...)
{
...
}
}
}
}
}
}
///

--
M S Herfried K. Wagner
M V P <URL:http://dotnet.mvps.org/>
V B <URL:http://classicvb.org/petition/>

Nov 21 '05 #46

Reginald Blue

Andrew Faust wrote:

"Carlos J. Quintero [.NET MVP]" wrote:
I agree on this. Languages are only a thin "layer" to learn on top
of the ..NET Framework beast.

I'd go it a step farther and say that programming languages are only
a thin layer on top of programming concepts. Once you get proficient
at the underlying logic of writing code, it becomes merely a matter
of a few days to learn syntax and some good reference books to become
functional in a new language.

There are a few exceptions to this.

For example, languages like Prolog, F#, LISP change some of the fundamental
nature of the way you think about what the code is and does. C++, for
example, encapsulates several different ways to code at once, which makes
reading it challenging at times.

But, certainly, within the confines of a particular paradigm (object
oriented/event driven/etc.) translating from one language to another is
quite simple.

--
Reginald Blue
"I have always wished that my computer would be as easy to use as my
telephone. My wish has come true. I no longer know how to use my
telephone."
- Bjarne Stroustrup (originator of C++) [quoted at the 2003
International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces]

Nov 21 '05 #47

Jon Skeet [C# MVP]

Cor Ligthert <no************@planet.nl> wrote:

"Massimo"
I'm not talking about aesthetics here, but about docing; when you've a
procedure with *so much* code and flow control inside, probably it's time
to split it into more smaller ones.

Did you try VBNet. I agree completly with you when it are C derived
languages.

As I said, try it, and than tell your expirience after that. Now your answer
looks for me like somebody who tells that he/she never played footbal (there
was something else before), however talks about if he/she is an expert in
it.

What about VB makes it "okay" in your view to have such deeply nested
functionality that would be abhorrent in C#? If it's that you have "End
If" "End For" etc then there's absolutely nothing to stop you from
commenting your C# in the same way:

for (...)
{
if (...)
{
...
} // If
} // For

Personally I don't like it or feel any need for it, but there's nothing
stopping you from doing it if you feel it adds readability.

--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.com>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too

Nov 21 '05 #48

Jon,

What about VB makes it "okay" in your view to have such deeply nested
functionality that would be abhorrent in C#? If it's that you have "End
If" "End For" etc then there's absolutely nothing to stop you from
commenting your C# in the same way:

for (...)
{
if (...)
{
...
} // If
} // For

Personally I don't like it or feel any need for it, but there's nothing
stopping you from doing it if you feel it adds readability.

I agree with you and probably will use in future your sample, which I to be
honest never thought of, however the difference is that it is at the moment
not automaticly done and as well not automaticly alligned direct when you
are busy.

However thanks for the idea

Cor

Nov 21 '05 #49