By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
459,947 Members | 1,505 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 459,947 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

From VB to c#

P: n/a
I am wondering if I should turn to C# from VB. How long will this turning
cost for an ordinary man?

Thanks for any response,

Peter
Jul 31 '07 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
37 Replies


P: n/a

Depends on how much Framework code you currently used in your projects

a progger with a lot of experience can code in anny language , you just have
a preference ( i can code XXX times faster VB as i can C++ , C# , Java etc
etc )
:-)
"Peter" wrote:
I am wondering if I should turn to C# from VB. How long will this turning
cost for an ordinary man?

Thanks for any response,

Peter
Jul 31 '07 #2

P: n/a
"Peter" <zl*****@sina.comschrieb
I am wondering if I should turn to C# from VB. How long will this
turning cost for an ordinary man?
Don't do it. You will get lost in an ancient, case sensitive language.
(That's my personal opinion and you will get 1001 that are different)
Armin

Jul 31 '07 #3

P: n/a
On 31 Lug, 12:00, "Peter" <zlxm...@sina.comwrote:
I am wondering if I should turn to C# from VB. How long will this turning
cost for an ordinary man?

Thanks for any response,

Peter
A "drastic"answer would be:

Dear Microsoft,

please, include pointers and unsafe code into VB too, make "Dim"
optional,
and flush away c# , c++

:-))

T

PS
no flames plz :-)

Jul 31 '07 #4

P: n/a
The more languages you know, the better off your team will be. I would
recommend a knowledge of at least both languages is a must these days.

"Peter" wrote:
I am wondering if I should turn to C# from VB. How long will this turning
cost for an ordinary man?

Thanks for any response,

Peter
Jul 31 '07 #5

P: n/a
Armin Zingler wrote:
"Peter" <zl*****@sina.comschrieb
>I am wondering if I should turn to C# from VB. How long will this
turning cost for an ordinary man?

Don't do it. You will get lost in an ancient, case sensitive language.
(That's my personal opinion and you will get 1001 that are different)
Armin
Do it.

You are currently lost in an ancient* language intended for beginners**.

* BASIC was developed in 1964.

** BASIC is an acronym for Beginner's All-purpose Symbolic Instruction Code.

:)

--
Göran Andersson
_____
http://www.guffa.com
Jul 31 '07 #6

P: n/a
"Göran Andersson" <gu***@guffa.comschrieb
Armin Zingler wrote:
"Peter" <zl*****@sina.comschrieb
I am wondering if I should turn to C# from VB. How long will
this turning cost for an ordinary man?
Don't do it. You will get lost in an ancient, case sensitive
language. (That's my personal opinion and you will get 1001 that
are different)
Armin

Do it.

You are currently lost in an ancient* language intended for
beginners**.

* BASIC was developed in 1964.
Cars have been developped in the 19th century.
** BASIC is an acronym for Beginner's All-purpose Symbolic
Instruction Code.

:)
So what? Don't judge by it's name.
Armin

Jul 31 '07 #7

P: n/a
Peter wrote:
I am wondering if I should turn to C# from VB. How long will this turning
cost for an ordinary man?
I strongly advice you learn programming in C# also. Regardless of the
language that you choose to use in the end, you will get:

:: A better understanding of the framwork.

:: A better understanding of how VB.NET really works.

:: The ability to understand examples written in both VB.NET and C#.
The C# language has half as many keywords as VB.NET, so expect it to be
easier to learn. The object orientation works the same as in VB.NET, and
all of the framework is the same, so it's pretty much just the syntax
that you have to learn, and perhaps some VB-quirks that you have to
un-learn. :)

--
Göran Andersson
_____
http://www.guffa.com
Jul 31 '07 #8

P: n/a
Armin Zingler wrote:
"Göran Andersson" <gu***@guffa.comschrieb
>Armin Zingler wrote:
"Peter" <zl*****@sina.comschrieb
I am wondering if I should turn to C# from VB. How long will
this turning cost for an ordinary man?

Don't do it. You will get lost in an ancient, case sensitive
language. (That's my personal opinion and you will get 1001 that
are different)
Armin

Do it.

You are currently lost in an ancient* language intended for
beginners**.

* BASIC was developed in 1964.

Cars have been developped in the 19th century.
C# was developed in the 21th century.
>** BASIC is an acronym for Beginner's All-purpose Symbolic
Instruction Code.

:)

So what? Don't judge by it's name.
That's not just the name. That's fundamental idea behind the language.

--
Göran Andersson
_____
http://www.guffa.com
Jul 31 '07 #9

P: n/a
"Göran Andersson" <gu***@guffa.comwrote in message news:%2****************@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
Armin Zingler wrote:
"Göran Andersson" <gu***@guffa.comschrieb
Armin Zingler wrote:
"Peter" <zl*****@sina.comschrieb
I am wondering if I should turn to C# from VB. How long will
this turning cost for an ordinary man?

Don't do it. You will get lost in an ancient, case sensitive
language. (That's my personal opinion and you will get 1001 that
are different)
Armin

Do it.

You are currently lost in an ancient* language intended for
beginners**.

* BASIC was developed in 1964.
Cars have been developped in the 19th century.

C# was developed in the 21th century.
So it hasn't been around long enought to be proven anything more than a passing fad.
** BASIC is an acronym for Beginner's All-purpose Symbolic
Instruction Code.

:)
So what? Don't judge by it's name.

That's not just the name. That's fundamental idea behind the language.
And C# is just a BASIC version of C++.
--
Göran Andersson
_____
http://www.guffa.com

Jul 31 '07 #10

P: n/a
"Göran Andersson" <gu***@guffa.comschrieb
Armin Zingler wrote:
"Göran Andersson" <gu***@guffa.comschrieb
Armin Zingler wrote:
"Peter" <zl*****@sina.comschrieb
I am wondering if I should turn to C# from VB. How long will
this turning cost for an ordinary man?

Don't do it. You will get lost in an ancient, case sensitive
language. (That's my personal opinion and you will get 1001
that are different)


Armin
>
Do it.
>
You are currently lost in an ancient* language intended for
beginners**.
>
* BASIC was developed in 1964.
Cars have been developped in the 19th century.

C# was developed in the 21th century.
VB.Net was developed in the 21th century.

But you didn't get the point: Cars are not ancient just because they've been
invented a long time ago. Just like VB.Net is not ancient because it's
pre-pre-decessor has been invented in 1964. Maybe you haven't had a a look
at the current VB.Net release, yet.

C# is ancient because case-sensitiveness has no right to live in 2007. Think
philanthropically. Or how do you pronounce the difference between the
"Thing" and the "thing"? Computers should be adapted to humans, not the
other way round. That's why I use BASIC.

** BASIC is an acronym for Beginner's All-purpose Symbolic
Instruction Code.
>
:)
So what? Don't judge by it's name.

That's not just the name. That's fundamental idea behind the
language.
Right for 1964. Wrong for VB.Net.
Armin

Jul 31 '07 #11

P: n/a
"Michel Posseth [MCP]" <Mi**************@discussions.microsoft.comha
scritto nel messaggio news:43623E12-14D4-47B6-A431-
Depends on how much Framework code you currently used in your projects
Yes, you must read this as "are you programming vb.net with old vb6
function? you'll take months and you won't understand the OOP. Are you
writing vb.net using the new framework power? a couple of days and you'll
read c#".

:)

This is what I think as a old lover of VB6.

--
Help The New .Net Site! http://www.devbox4.net
Jul 31 '07 #12

P: n/a
"Armin Zingler" <az*******@freenet.deha scritto nel messaggio
news:uT**************@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
"Peter" <zl*****@sina.comschrieb
>I am wondering if I should turn to C# from VB. How long will this
turning cost for an ordinary man?

Don't do it. You will get lost in an ancient, case sensitive language.
(That's my personal opinion and you will get 1001 that are different)
This is a really child-answer.
When I worked (and I loved it) with VB6 I thinked "how can c++ programmers
work with casesensitive languages?".
Today I passed to c# and the casesesitivity of c# was immediatly ignored for
some reasons:
- there are some guidelines that let you ALWAYS know what you have to write.
- the IDE (VS, #D, ...) help you drastically showing you what you have to
write.
- thanks to the previous point you may write a program replacing the SHIFT
key with the SPACE/ENTER/( keys in the intellisense.

Now I write in all VB.Net an C# and prefere C# because is really clear to
read... a

public int X
{
}

is a little more simple that

Public Propety X As Integer
End Property

--
Help The New .Net Site! http://www.devbox4.net
Jul 31 '07 #13

P: n/a
Armin Zingler wrote:
"Göran Andersson" <gu***@guffa.comschrieb
>Armin Zingler wrote:
"Göran Andersson" <gu***@guffa.comschrieb
Armin Zingler wrote:
"Peter" <zl*****@sina.comschrieb
I am wondering if I should turn to C# from VB. How long will
this turning cost for an ordinary man?

Don't do it. You will get lost in an ancient, case sensitive
language. (That's my personal opinion and you will get 1001
that are different)
Armin

Do it.

You are currently lost in an ancient* language intended for
beginners**.

* BASIC was developed in 1964.

Cars have been developped in the 19th century.

C# was developed in the 21th century.

VB.Net was developed in the 21th century.
But the language VB is much older.

Unlike C#, that was developed for the .NET platform, VB.NET is an
adaption for the .NET platform of an existing language.
But you didn't get the point: Cars are not ancient just because they've
been invented a long time ago. Just like VB.Net is not ancient because
it's pre-pre-decessor has been invented in 1964.
Maybe you haven't had a a look at the current VB.Net release, yet.
Of course I have. Eventhough I don't use it myself, I regularely answer
questions about it.
C# is ancient because case-sensitiveness has no right to live in 2007.
Think philanthropically.
I fail to see how that has anything at all to do with philanthropy.
Perhaps you mean user-centered?
Or how do you pronounce the difference between
the "Thing" and the "thing"? Computers should be adapted to humans, not
the other way round. That's why I use BASIC.
Programming is such a computer-centered task anyway, so making it case
insensetive doesn't really make is more user-centered.
>
** BASIC is an acronym for Beginner's All-purpose Symbolic
Instruction Code.

:)

So what? Don't judge by it's name.

That's not just the name. That's fundamental idea behind the
language.

Right for 1964. Wrong for VB.Net.
Armin
--
Göran Andersson
_____
http://www.guffa.com
Jul 31 '07 #14

P: n/a
On 31 Lug, 16:28, "Fabio" <znt.fa...@virgilio.itwrote:
"Armin Zingler" <az.nos...@freenet.deha scritto nel messaggionews:uT**************@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gb l...
"Peter" <zlxm...@sina.comschrieb
I am wondering if I should turn to C# from VB. How long will this
turning cost for an ordinary man?
Don't do it. You will get lost in an ancient, case sensitive language.
(That's my personal opinion and you will get 1001 that are different)

This is a really child-answer.
When I worked (and I loved it) with VB6 I thinked "how can c++ programmers
work with casesensitive languages?".
Today I passed to c# and the casesesitivity of c# was immediatly ignored for
some reasons:
- there are some guidelines that let you ALWAYS know what you have to write.
- the IDE (VS, #D, ...) help you drastically showing you what you have to
write.
- thanks to the previous point you may write a program replacing the SHIFT
key with the SPACE/ENTER/( keys in the intellisense.

Now I write in all VB.Net an C# and prefere C# because is really clear to
read... a

public int X
{

}

is a little more simple that

Public Propety X As Integer
End Property

--
Help The New .Net Site!http://www.devbox4.net
I wouldn't mention that. Pehaps you will be able to say that
the day that "With" arrives to c# too !

In the meantime I would not bring out this argument.

There are only a few limited applications which justify the use of
of that masochistic environment nowadays.
And for those you can write small libraries. No problem.

For the rest the c# IDE is just "crap" as someone (not me)
as already defined it *comparing* it to the vb's.

You do in 10x what can be done in x.

:-)

T

Jul 31 '07 #15

P: n/a
Armin,

Don't pay attention to Goran, he is a lover of C# (you won't believe it) in
my eyes even more than Jon Skeet. He comes often over here and tells than C#
rules in this newsgroup, while Jon avoid that already for years.

Goran certainly knows a lot of Net and C#, however is not able to think that
VB.Net has many things better than C#, because those are never in his focus.

Basic was the first program language of Microsoft, in my idea is the
grandchild VB.Net still the best program language of Microsoft.

Business wise I write a lot of C# however am forever glad when I can use
VB.Net, all was it only that I don't have to build to see all my typing
errors.

Good answer by the way..

Cor

"Armin Zingler" <az*******@freenet.deschreef in bericht
news:uT**************@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
"Peter" <zl*****@sina.comschrieb
>I am wondering if I should turn to C# from VB. How long will this
turning cost for an ordinary man?

Don't do it. You will get lost in an ancient, case sensitive language.
(That's my personal opinion and you will get 1001 that are different)
Armin
Jul 31 '07 #16

P: n/a
The C# language has half as many keywords as VB.NET,
Do you mean that you can do with C# half as much as in VB.Net?

Cor
Jul 31 '07 #17

P: n/a
"Göran Andersson" <gu***@guffa.comschrieb
* BASIC was developed in 1964.

Cars have been developped in the 19th century.
>
C# was developed in the 21th century.
VB.Net was developed in the 21th century.

But the language VB is much older.
The language C is much older, too. :)
Unlike C#, that was developed for the .NET platform, VB.NET is an
adaption for the .NET platform of an existing language.
Same for C#. If C# was completely new, there was no need to put
case-sensitivity in again. What for? There's no need to have it. It's not
even CLS compliant (IIRC). So it's only there for C historic reasons. No
practical usefulness.

What do you say to VB6 programmers that complain that, in VB.Net, everything
has changed and nothing is like before? Maybe because VB.Net has been built
from the ground up? (even though I know that some things are considered
"legacy" features).

C# is ancient because case-sensitiveness has no right to live in
2007. Think philanthropically.

I fail to see how that has anything at all to do with philanthropy.
Perhaps you mean user-centered?
Isn't it also part of a development that also includes ergonomic design and
adapting machines to human beings, which is considered a philantrophic
approach?
Or how do you pronounce the difference between
the "Thing" and the "thing"? Computers should be adapted to
humans, not the other way round. That's why I use BASIC.

Programming is such a computer-centered task anyway,
Programming is done by humans. Therefore it is a human-/user-centered task.
Identifiers have been invented for humans, not for computers.
so making it
case insensetive doesn't really make is more user-centered.
IMO, it does, because the user/programmer doesn't have to care about it
anymore.
Finally, I don't think that programming is human friendly in any case. :-)
Not as long as having a machine do a simple thing requires so many words.
Armin

Jul 31 '07 #18

P: n/a
On Jul 31, 11:42 am, "Cor Ligthert[MVP]" <notmyfirstn...@planet.nl>
wrote:
The C# language has half as many keywords as VB.NET,

Do you mean that you can do with C# half as much as in VB.Net?

Cor
I think he is referring to the verbosity of Visual Basic compared to
C#.

i.e.

Public Overriderable Property MyProperty() As String
Get
...
End Get
Set (ByVal value As String)
...
End Set
End Property

Can be written in C# as:

public virtual string MyProperty {
get {
...;
}
set {
...;
}
}

Thats 18 words in Visual Basic versus 6 words in C#.

Which is better? Who cares!

I don't pick a language based on verbosity or case-sensitivity or if I
have to terminate each line with a semi-colon. I pick a language based
on the features of the language that are going to benefit me the most
in the project.

For example, if I'm going to do a lot of string to number conversions
I would use VB for the IsNumeric and CInt keywords which aren't
present in C# (yes the functionality is there, but it's not nearly as
easy to use as in VB). Similarly, I would pick C# if I plan on wiring
up a lot of events and/or delegates since I prefer the C# syntax
(myButton.Click += new EventHandler(MyHandler);) to the syntax Visual
Basic uses (AddHandler myButton.Click, AddressOf MyHandler)

Overall it's a personally preference - most people in this group will
argue that VB is better. Just like if this were a topic in the C#
group the opinions would all be that C# is the way to go. This topic
is almost as futile as arguing that a Porsche is better than a BMW -
both cars have a huge following that will never be convinced that the
other is better - no matter what features each car includes.

Thanks,

Seth Rowe

Jul 31 '07 #19

P: n/a
"Cor Ligthert[MVP]" <no************@planet.nlschrieb
Armin,

Don't pay attention to Goran, he is a lover of C# (you won't believe
it) in my eyes even more than Jon Skeet. He comes often over here
and tells than C# rules in this newsgroup, while Jon avoid that
already for years.

Goran certainly knows a lot of Net and C#, however is not able to
think that VB.Net has many things better than C#, because those are
never in his focus.
Thanks for the information. Wasn't here for some month, as you know. :)
Basic was the first program language of Microsoft, in my idea is the
grandchild VB.Net still the best program language of Microsoft.

Business wise I write a lot of C# however am forever glad when I can
use VB.Net, all was it only that I don't have to build to see all my
typing errors.

Just to make it clear:
I don't think that C# is the "worse" language. Both languages have it's
benefits and drawbacks. Everyone should choose his favorite, mainly
depending on what language he used before (C++/VB6). It's just the point
that case-sensitivity affects /my/ everyday's programming and typing to such
an extent that it is an exclusion criterion for the whole language (for me).
(just like the ";" at the end of each line...). I did not much C
programming, but whenever I did it, the most time I spent was cOrreCting ThE
CaSe. It s***** too much. Because this is such a very basic feature of the
language, I decline it completely.

Well, there's intellisense and auto-complete in C#, too, but in C# 2003 it
was much less powerful than in VB 2003, therefore I still had many problems.
Maybe this has changed in the C# 2005 IDE, but AFAIR the very few times I
used C# 2005 (Express), it was still not as good as in VB.Net.
Good answer by the way..
Thanks. :)
Armin

Jul 31 '07 #20

P: n/a
Rowe,

Goran is not using VB.Net he only sees it, by instance he does not know (as
I did some minutes ago) that writing a property in VB.Net takes half the
time as in C#, just because that as you have written: Public Property X as
Integer" you are almost ready because the most writting is than done
automaticly for you by the intelligent behaviour of VB.Net.

As C# would have the same intellisence, (which is in VB.Net even improved
again by the option Infer) then I maybe would find C# as good as VB.Net.

There are very few things I like in C# more then in VB.Net. Maybe the fact
that I don't have to write that crazy Dim statement, which is in my opinion
real from the old box as we say it here.

Cor

"rowe_newsgroups" <ro********@yahoo.comschreef in bericht
news:11**********************@d55g2000hsg.googlegr oups.com...
On Jul 31, 11:42 am, "Cor Ligthert[MVP]" <notmyfirstn...@planet.nl>
wrote:
The C# language has half as many keywords as VB.NET,

Do you mean that you can do with C# half as much as in VB.Net?

Cor

I think he is referring to the verbosity of Visual Basic compared to
C#.

i.e.

Public Overriderable Property MyProperty() As String
Get
...
End Get
Set (ByVal value As String)
...
End Set
End Property

Can be written in C# as:

public virtual string MyProperty {
get {
...;
}
set {
...;
}
}

Thats 18 words in Visual Basic versus 6 words in C#.

Which is better? Who cares!

I don't pick a language based on verbosity or case-sensitivity or if I
have to terminate each line with a semi-colon. I pick a language based
on the features of the language that are going to benefit me the most
in the project.

For example, if I'm going to do a lot of string to number conversions
I would use VB for the IsNumeric and CInt keywords which aren't
present in C# (yes the functionality is there, but it's not nearly as
easy to use as in VB). Similarly, I would pick C# if I plan on wiring
up a lot of events and/or delegates since I prefer the C# syntax
(myButton.Click += new EventHandler(MyHandler);) to the syntax Visual
Basic uses (AddHandler myButton.Click, AddressOf MyHandler)

Overall it's a personally preference - most people in this group will
argue that VB is better. Just like if this were a topic in the C#
group the opinions would all be that C# is the way to go. This topic
is almost as futile as arguing that a Porsche is better than a BMW -
both cars have a huge following that will never be convinced that the
other is better - no matter what features each car includes.

Thanks,

Seth Rowe
Jul 31 '07 #21

P: n/a
rowe_newsgroups wrote:
On Jul 31, 11:42 am, "Cor Ligthert[MVP]" <notmyfirstn...@planet.nl>
wrote:
>>The C# language has half as many keywords as VB.NET,
Do you mean that you can do with C# half as much as in VB.Net?

Cor

I think he is referring to the verbosity of Visual Basic compared to
C#.
What I meant is that there is literally half as many keywords in C# as
there is in VB.NET.

There are 77 keywords in C#.
There are 156 keywords in VB.NET.
I don't mind verbosity much. Typing isn't really that big a part of
programming, at least not if you are doing something that is the least
bit challenging. :)
--
Göran Andersson
_____
http://www.guffa.com
Jul 31 '07 #22

P: n/a
Goran is not using VB.Net he only sees it, by instance he does not know (as
I did some minutes ago) that writing a property in VB.Net takes half the
time as in C#, just because that as you have written: Public Property X as
Integer" you are almost ready because the most writting is than done
automaticly for you by the intelligent behaviour of VB.Net.
You are definitely correct that the VB ide helps much more than the C#
one does when it comes to completing structures. This feature of the
IDE takes away Goran's argument of "less keywords means better
language."
As C# would have the same intellisence, (which is in VB.Net even improved
again by the option Infer) then I maybe would find C# as good as VB.Net.
Many times I wish that the VB intellisense box would open as soon as
you start typing a type/method name like it does with C#. That is
about the only thing I have against the VB ide - everything thing else
seems superior to me also.
There are very few things I like in C# more then in VB.Net. Maybe the fact
that I don't have to write that crazy Dim statement, which is in my opinion
real from the old box as we say it here.
I wouldn't mind having anonymous delegates (are they in Orcas?) or the
event declaration syntax that C# has.

Thanks,

Seth Rowe

Jul 31 '07 #23

P: n/a
Cor Ligthert[MVP] wrote:
>
>The C# language has half as many keywords as VB.NET,

Do you mean that you can do with C# half as much as in VB.Net?

Cor
Not at all. There is very little difference in what you can do with C#
and VB.NET.

You just don't have to learn as many keywords to do it in C#. :)

--
Göran Andersson
_____
http://www.guffa.com
Jul 31 '07 #24

P: n/a
Cor Ligthert[MVP] wrote:
Don't pay attention to Goran, he is a lover of C# (you won't believe it)
in my eyes even more than Jon Skeet.
Don't pay any attention to Cor. Half of the time he doesn't know what
he's talking about, and the other half you can't tell what he's trying
to say... ;)
He comes often over here and tells than C# rules in this newsgroup
Not at all.

I come here (not "over here") often to answer questions.

Occationally I discuss languages.

Of the last 125 posts that I see in the newsgroup history, spanning the
last three months, only the posts in this thread has anything at all to
do with different languages.

--
Göran Andersson
_____
http://www.guffa.com
Jul 31 '07 #25

P: n/a
Cor Ligthert[MVP] wrote:
Rowe,

Goran is not using VB.Net he only sees it, by instance he does not know
(as I did some minutes ago) that writing a property in VB.Net takes
half the time as in C#, just because that as you have written: Public
Property X as Integer" you are almost ready because the most writting is
than done automaticly for you by the intelligent behaviour of VB.Net.
If you really think that the typing is the hard part of programming, you
can't be doing very advanced programming...

--
Göran Andersson
_____
http://www.guffa.com
Jul 31 '07 #26

P: n/a
"Göran Andersson" <gu***@guffa.comschrieb:
>>* BASIC was developed in 1964.

Cars have been developped in the 19th century.

C# was developed in the 21th century.
VB.NET was developed in the 21st century too.
>>** BASIC is an acronym for Beginner's All-purpose Symbolic
Instruction Code.

:)

So what? Don't judge by it's name.

That's not just the name. That's fundamental idea behind the language.
It's an all-purpose language opposed to C#, which is suitable for scenarios
in which object-orientation is the best solution only.

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

Jul 31 '07 #27

P: n/a
"Göran Andersson" <gu***@guffa.comschrieb:
>C# is ancient because case-sensitiveness has no right to live in 2007.
Think philanthropically.

I fail to see how that has anything at all to do with philanthropy.
Perhaps you mean user-centered?
>Or how do you pronounce the difference between the "Thing" and the
"thing"? Computers should be adapted to humans, not the other way round.
That's why I use BASIC.

Programming is such a computer-centered task anyway, so making it case
insensetive doesn't really make is more user-centered.
Well, this question has been answered already years ago in HCI/usability
research. There is a broad consensus that case-sensitivity is a bad idea
for data primarily intended for processing by a human (which source code
is).

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

Jul 31 '07 #28

P: n/a
rowe_newsgroups wrote:
>Goran is not using VB.Net he only sees it, by instance he does not know (as
I did some minutes ago) that writing a property in VB.Net takes half the
time as in C#, just because that as you have written: Public Property X as
Integer" you are almost ready because the most writting is than done
automaticly for you by the intelligent behaviour of VB.Net.

You are definitely correct that the VB ide helps much more than the C#
one does when it comes to completing structures. This feature of the
IDE takes away Goran's argument of "less keywords means better
language."
Please don't quote me on something that I have never said.

What I said was: "The C# language has half as many keywords as VB.NET,
so expect it to be easier to learn."

You still have to learn the language, even if the intellisense helps you
type it.

--
Göran Andersson
_____
http://www.guffa.com
Jul 31 '07 #29

P: n/a
Thanks for all of your comments on my question,and now I can almost decide
to use VB still, bacause of it is not case sensitive,with My namespace,the
same OOP as C#, no need not type "Ł»" and so on. And I will go on with my
"Dim ... as ... "

Peter
Aug 1 '07 #30

P: n/a
"to**************@uniroma1.it" <To**************@gmail.comha scritto nel
messaggio
I wouldn't mention that.
That... "what"?
I sayd many things.

Pehaps you will be able to say that
the day that "With" arrives to c# too !
I hope it never reach c#: With is a bed practice, but not for the clear of
the text of what I talken about.

In the meantime I would not bring out this argument.
Yes, it is not in this argument.

There are only a few limited applications which justify the use of
of that masochistic environment nowadays.
What environment?
But you never use subjects? :)

And for those you can write small libraries. No problem.
with .Net langages?

For the rest the c# IDE is just "crap" as someone (not me)
as already defined it *comparing* it to the vb's.
VS for C# is LOOOOOONG better that VS for VB.Net.
When I pass to VB.Net and I write I always think "why does not VS suggest
this as it does with c#?" "why does not VS help me with intellisense as it
does with c#?".

But did you tryed it? :)

You do in 10x what can be done in x.
Yes, write and debug in C# is really faster that in vb.net.

And this is what a vb6 lover thinks of vb.net ;)

--
Help The New .Net Site! http://www.devbox4.net
Aug 1 '07 #31

P: n/a
"Armin Zingler" <az*******@freenet.deha scritto nel messaggio
news:eC**************@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>But the language VB is much older.

The language C is much older, too. :)
What stuid flame.
Who look if vb/c++/c#/boo/php/pippirippě is older?

Whe are talking if one can know vb.net AND c# or only VB.Net.

--
Help The New .Net Site! http://www.devbox4.net
Aug 1 '07 #32

P: n/a
On Jul 31, 12:47 pm, rowe_newsgroups <rowe_em...@yahoo.comwrote:
Goran is not using VB.Net he only sees it, by instance he does not know (as
I did some minutes ago) that writing a property in VB.Net takes half the
time as in C#, just because that as you have written: Public Property X as
Integer" you are almost ready because the most writting is than done
automaticly for you by the intelligent behaviour of VB.Net.

You are definitely correct that the VB ide helps much more than the C#
one does when it comes to completing structures. This feature of the
IDE takes away Goran's argument of "less keywords means better
language."
As C# would have the same intellisence, (which is in VB.Net even improved
again by the option Infer) then I maybe would find C# as good as VB.Net.
VB.Net intellisense was much better that C# in VS2003, but in VS2005,
I think that gap has been closed. In VS2005 in C# for example, for a
property I need only type prop and press TAB and it inserts the entire
property skeleton. This is provided by the Code Snippets feature.
While VB.Net also supports code snippets, they don't work the same as
C#. Also in C#, as soon as I start typing anything, I immediately
get intellisense. That doesn't happen in VB.Net.

I'm not saying that makes C# superior, but the VB.Net IDE does not
really provide any advantage over C# IMO.

I think as a .Net developer, you should learn both languages because
you may need to read an example in one language that is not available
in another and being able to convert back and forth is a valuable
skill.

Chris

Aug 2 '07 #33

P: n/a
Hi,

The runtime capabilities of both languages are pretty much on par. The big
differences are more in the design time. There's some features in C# that
are useful such as anonymous delegates which VB will only have in part in VB
2008. But generally those features aren't really that important to me..
they are nice haves, but if the feature is really important VB usually
follows up and gets it in the version after C#. As far as major
functionality goes, I find VB to be a lot more productive.

Things such as:

- the My namespace
This makes it really easy to do a lot of simple tasks quick and easy via
My.Computer and My.User etc.

- Background compiler
When you fix a mistake you can tell immediately instead of having to do
a complete compile. This is huge on big projects.

- With blocks
I just love 'em

- Declarative event handling
makes it easy to see what code is wired to events as well as unwire
events (more robust abstraction)

- Code editing combo boxes.
The combo boxes in the code editor make it really easy to add events and
navigate objects inside your component

- Declarative interfaces
again the code is self explanatory

- late binding
helps when working with Office/COM and will be more important in dynamic
systems (DLR in VB 10)

- Optional Parameters
essential for working with Office

There's more than that, but The optional parameters one is one I like to
highlight. It shows VB is built around existing systems and working with
them. Consider this code to work with a dialog in Excel:

If xlApp.Dialogs(Excel.XlBuiltInDialog.xlDialogOpen). Show(sTextName) Then

Now there's the C# code:

if(xlApp.Dialogs[Excel.XlBuiltInDialog.xlDialogOpen].Show(sTextName,
Type.Missing, Type.Missing, Type.Missing, Type.Missing, Type.Missing,
Type.Missing, Type.Missing, Type.Missing, Type.Missing, Type.Missing,
Type.Missing, Type.Missing, Type.Missing, Type.Missing, Type.Missing,
Type.Missing, Type.Missing, Type.Missing, Type.Missing, Type.Missing,
Type.Missing, Type.Missing, Type.Missing, Type.Missing, Type.Missing,
Type.Missing, Type.Missing, Type.Missing, Type.Missing)
And if I look at the next version of VB, VB9, due out end of this year -
January 2008, there's features C# doesn't have like a really cool experience
when working with XML. As Office moves to XML again VB is the language of
choice, the right tool for the job.

Seriously, if you are writing code like the C# code above, you are using the
wrong tool for the job, which then begs why use C# at all if you can learn
just one ? I still recommend people at least learn to read C#, but do
invest the time into learning the features of VB and you'll find, more often
than not it is the right tool to use :)



"Chris Dunaway" <du******@gmail.comwrote in message
news:11**********************@g4g2000hsf.googlegro ups.com...
On Jul 31, 12:47 pm, rowe_newsgroups <rowe_em...@yahoo.comwrote:
Goran is not using VB.Net he only sees it, by instance he does not know
(as
I did some minutes ago) that writing a property in VB.Net takes half
the
time as in C#, just because that as you have written: Public Property X
as
Integer" you are almost ready because the most writting is than done
automaticly for you by the intelligent behaviour of VB.Net.

You are definitely correct that the VB ide helps much more than the C#
one does when it comes to completing structures. This feature of the
IDE takes away Goran's argument of "less keywords means better
language."
As C# would have the same intellisence, (which is in VB.Net even
improved
again by the option Infer) then I maybe would find C# as good as
VB.Net.

VB.Net intellisense was much better that C# in VS2003, but in VS2005,
I think that gap has been closed. In VS2005 in C# for example, for a
property I need only type prop and press TAB and it inserts the entire
property skeleton. This is provided by the Code Snippets feature.
While VB.Net also supports code snippets, they don't work the same as
C#. Also in C#, as soon as I start typing anything, I immediately
get intellisense. That doesn't happen in VB.Net.

I'm not saying that makes C# superior, but the VB.Net IDE does not
really provide any advantage over C# IMO.

I think as a .Net developer, you should learn both languages because
you may need to read an example in one language that is not available
in another and being able to convert back and forth is a valuable
skill.

Chris
Aug 6 '07 #34

P: n/a
Herfried K. Wagner [MVP] wrote:
>>>** BASIC is an acronym for Beginner's All-purpose Symbolic
Instruction Code.

:)

So what? Don't judge by it's name.

That's not just the name. That's fundamental idea behind the language.

It's an all-purpose language opposed to C#, which is suitable for
scenarios in which object-orientation is the best solution only.
VB.NET is object oriented too, but perhaps you missed that small detail?

--
Göran Andersson
_____
http://www.guffa.com
Aug 7 '07 #35

P: n/a
Goran
>It's an all-purpose language opposed to C#, which is suitable for
scenarios in which object-orientation is the best solution only.

VB.NET is object oriented too, but perhaps you missed that small detail?
I was lucky surprised to see this from you?

I think Herfried is pointing on the MY solution in VB.Net which started in
2.0 in our opinion (I think that in this sentence I can speak too for
Herfried)something to help the VB6 developer to make an easier step to
VB.Net.

I cannot say that I am really lucky with this, it is AFAIK something as
automatically creating static modules, something as it was in my eyes
terrible VB6. Not really object oriented programming.

Cor
Aug 8 '07 #36

P: n/a
Cor Ligthert [MVP] wrote:
>>It's an all-purpose language opposed to C#, which is suitable for
scenarios in which object-orientation is the best solution only.
VB.NET is object oriented too, but perhaps you missed that small detail?
I was lucky surprised to see this from you?
Why? Did you think that I didn't know that?

--
Göran Andersson
_____
http://www.guffa.com
Aug 8 '07 #37

P: n/a
Hi Goran,

Why you read all my messages through negative glasses. Mostly they are
positive meant, however I try to be honest, so sometimes I want to show you
a mirror.

Don't expect that I think I am without errors. I have made a lot of them in
my life.

However I tell always errors are the best learning school.

Cor

"Göran Andersson" <gu***@guffa.comschreef in bericht
news:u7**************@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
Cor Ligthert [MVP] wrote:
>>>It's an all-purpose language opposed to C#, which is suitable for
scenarios in which object-orientation is the best solution only.

VB.NET is object oriented too, but perhaps you missed that small detail?
I was lucky surprised to see this from you?

Why? Did you think that I didn't know that?

--
Göran Andersson
_____
http://www.guffa.com
Aug 8 '07 #38

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.