Comments on: What is the next VB 1.0? http://blog.componentoriented.com/2008/10/what-is-the-next-vb-10/ My thoughts on software development Mon, 08 Mar 2010 20:44:17 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 By: D. Lambert http://blog.componentoriented.com/2008/10/what-is-the-next-vb-10/comment-page-1/#comment-420 D. Lambert Fri, 10 Oct 2008 08:12:38 +0000 http://blog.componentoriented.com/?p=281#comment-420 Keep your fingers crossed - I think MS is planning some big advances in dynamic language support in VS.next. Rumor has it we'll hear some announcements from PDC. Speaking of dynamic languages, have you heard of Phalanger.net? It's a PHP compiler for .Net. It looks like the project has sort of withered, which is too bad - I tried to get Wordpress running on it, and it looked like it would have worked if I could have gotten it to connect to MySQL. Keep your fingers crossed – I think MS is planning some big advances in dynamic language support in VS.next. Rumor has it we'll hear some announcements from PDC. Speaking of dynamic languages, have you heard of Phalanger.net? It's a PHP compiler for .Net. It looks like the project has sort of withered, which is too bad – I tried to get Wordpress running on it, and it looked like it would have worked if I could have gotten it to connect to MySQL.

]]> By: Lucas Goodwin http://blog.componentoriented.com/2008/10/what-is-the-next-vb-10/comment-page-1/#comment-419 Lucas Goodwin Fri, 10 Oct 2008 05:24:44 +0000 http://blog.componentoriented.com/?p=281#comment-419 There's not much to define VB.NET from C#. Not like with F# or Ruby, etc. Synatically it's very verbose. It has a few syntax add-ons like events, but lacks others like anonymous delegates. In fact there's nothing you can't do in C# that you can do in VB.NET, but there's plenty you can do in C# that you can't in VB.NET.<br><br>Unless MS does something to VB.NET to set it apart from C#, the equation of which to use will continue to shift to C#. There's not much to define VB.NET from C#. Not like with F# or Ruby, etc. Synatically it's very verbose. It has a few syntax add-ons like events, but lacks others like anonymous delegates. In fact there's nothing you can't do in C# that you can do in VB.NET, but there's plenty you can do in C# that you can't in VB.NET.

Unless MS does something to VB.NET to set it apart from C#, the equation of which to use will continue to shift to C#.

]]> By: dlambert http://blog.componentoriented.com/2008/10/what-is-the-next-vb-10/comment-page-1/#comment-124 dlambert Fri, 10 Oct 2008 04:12:38 +0000 http://blog.componentoriented.com/?p=281#comment-124 Keep your fingers crossed - I think MS is planning some big advances in dynamic language support in VS.next. Rumor has it we'll hear some announcements from PDC. Speaking of dynamic languages, have you heard of Phalanger.net? It's a PHP compiler for .Net. It looks like the project has sort of withered, which is too bad - I tried to get Wordpress running on it, and it looked like it would have worked if I could have gotten it to connect to MySQL. Keep your fingers crossed – I think MS is planning some big advances in dynamic language support in VS.next. Rumor has it we'll hear some announcements from PDC. Speaking of dynamic languages, have you heard of Phalanger.net? It's a PHP compiler for .Net. It looks like the project has sort of withered, which is too bad – I tried to get Wordpress running on it, and it looked like it would have worked if I could have gotten it to connect to MySQL.

]]> By: Lucas Goodwin http://blog.componentoriented.com/2008/10/what-is-the-next-vb-10/comment-page-1/#comment-123 Lucas Goodwin Fri, 10 Oct 2008 01:24:44 +0000 http://blog.componentoriented.com/?p=281#comment-123 There's not much to define VB.NET from C#. Not like with F# or Ruby, etc. Synatically it's very verbose. It has a few syntax add-ons like events, but lacks others like anonymous delegates. In fact there's nothing you can't do in C# that you can do in VB.NET, but there's plenty you can do in C# that you can't in VB.NET.<br><br>Unless MS does something to VB.NET to set it apart from C#, the equation of which to use will continue to shift to C#. There's not much to define VB.NET from C#. Not like with F# or Ruby, etc. Synatically it's very verbose. It has a few syntax add-ons like events, but lacks others like anonymous delegates. In fact there's nothing you can't do in C# that you can do in VB.NET, but there's plenty you can do in C# that you can't in VB.NET.

Unless MS does something to VB.NET to set it apart from C#, the equation of which to use will continue to shift to C#.

]]> By: dlambert http://blog.componentoriented.com/2008/10/what-is-the-next-vb-10/comment-page-1/#comment-121 dlambert Thu, 09 Oct 2008 14:18:22 +0000 http://blog.componentoriented.com/?p=281#comment-121 I made the jump to C# a bit over two years ago. It was much easier going from another .Net language because the framework is such a big part of .Net development. At the time, though, I certainly got the sense that C# was a lot more verbose than the equivalent VB.Net code.<br><br>Personally, I think it's unfortunate that MS has marginalized VB.Net to the extent they have. Although they keep saying that they're behind VB.Net 100%, there's absolutely no question at all that it's a secondary language for them. <br><br>The good news is that VB.Net doesn't appear to be in imminent danger of turning into Foxpro. There are still syntax improvements that are happening in VB.Net before C#, and this will help create "cross-pollination" among .Net languages that should improve all of them over time. I made the jump to C# a bit over two years ago. It was much easier going from another .Net language because the framework is such a big part of .Net development. At the time, though, I certainly got the sense that C# was a lot more verbose than the equivalent VB.Net code.

Personally, I think it's unfortunate that MS has marginalized VB.Net to the extent they have. Although they keep saying that they're behind VB.Net 100%, there's absolutely no question at all that it's a secondary language for them.

The good news is that VB.Net doesn't appear to be in imminent danger of turning into Foxpro. There are still syntax improvements that are happening in VB.Net before C#, and this will help create “cross-pollination” among .Net languages that should improve all of them over time.

]]> By: Lucas Goodwin http://blog.componentoriented.com/2008/10/what-is-the-next-vb-10/comment-page-1/#comment-120 Lucas Goodwin Thu, 09 Oct 2008 06:28:51 +0000 http://blog.componentoriented.com/?p=281#comment-120 My current shop uses all VB.NET. What got them started in that route was ASP 3. That, and, if you really want to, you can basically write VB6 style code in VB.NET. The way I look at it, all IDEs now have generalized the VB phenomenon by building in the Visual Editors, code completion, real-time compiling, etc. I'd say today all of .NET is VB.<br><br>You are right though, there isn't really a VB contender the way the old VB existed in the market.<br><br>Oh, and the largely conversational style of VB.NET's language is still much easier for people to grasp then C#, et al. I came from a C++ background, but like I said, most of my co-workers were "script kiddies" originally. C# is still very difficult for them to read and write... My current shop uses all VB.NET. What got them started in that route was ASP 3. That, and, if you really want to, you can basically write VB6 style code in VB.NET. The way I look at it, all IDEs now have generalized the VB phenomenon by building in the Visual Editors, code completion, real-time compiling, etc. I'd say today all of .NET is VB.

You are right though, there isn't really a VB contender the way the old VB existed in the market.

Oh, and the largely conversational style of VB.NET's language is still much easier for people to grasp then C#, et al. I came from a C++ background, but like I said, most of my co-workers were “script kiddies” originally. C# is still very difficult for them to read and write…

]]> By: 2 Ways to Approach Building a Legend Platform | Direct Response, Real World Branding and The Magic Teleseminar - Branding with Ben Mack! http://blog.componentoriented.com/2008/10/what-is-the-next-vb-10/comment-page-1/#comment-119 2 Ways to Approach Building a Legend Platform | Direct Response, Real World Branding and The Magic Teleseminar - Branding with Ben Mack! Wed, 08 Oct 2008 21:43:20 +0000 http://blog.componentoriented.com/?p=281#comment-119 [...] What is the next VB 1.0? [...] [...] What is the next VB 1.0? [...]

]]> By: topwebbusinesses » Blog Archive » What is the next VB 1.0? http://blog.componentoriented.com/2008/10/what-is-the-next-vb-10/comment-page-1/#comment-118 topwebbusinesses » Blog Archive » What is the next VB 1.0? Wed, 08 Oct 2008 13:35:41 +0000 http://blog.componentoriented.com/?p=281#comment-118 [...] Original dlambert [...] [...] Original dlambert [...]

]]>