Bundling VB Files?
in [Visual Studio]
|
Prev: hooking into a window and peeking/poking memory
Next: Mike Williams' ideal world (Was: Bundling VB Files?)
From: Tom Shelton on 4 Aug 2010 20:50 Mayayana brought next idea : >> >> There just isn't a decent replacement. For every language that possess >> one or more of those features, it fails, and often dramatically >> elsewhere. >> > > If it were me I think I'd use javascript. As much > as I don't especially like C syntax, JS can be used > to make useful utilities with Windows Script Host. > It's also the lingua franca of the Web. Hmmm... jscript is an option, and it does have a very large presence on the web - but, I still think I would prefere something a little more interactive. I've been doing a bit of work in ruby and python (and I mean the official ruby and python - not iron ruby and iron python) lately - and I have to say for a quick get it done or smallish app language, I don't think they can be beat. Being able to type in command and get immediate feedback is really nice for a beginner I would think. Also, with dynamically typed languages a beginner can focus on the concepts of programming rather then minute details such as variable types, etc. And ruby-on-rails is actually a very popular web app framework... So, learning ruby might not be such a bad thing either as far as the web is concerned. As far aw wsh... blah. After what I've been doing the last couple days in powershell 2 - I would never again attempt to use wsh. Wouldn't suggest it a first language though :) -- Tom Shelton
From: Mayayana on 5 Aug 2010 00:00 | | As far aw wsh... blah. After what I've been doing the last couple days | in powershell 2 - I would never again attempt to use wsh. Wouldn't | suggest it a first language though :) | Powershell is command line for sys admins. Glorified DOS, souped up with .Net, designed to lure anti-GUI Linux geeks to Windows servers. Not very appealing to non-tech people trying to see a point in programming.
From: Tom Shelton on 5 Aug 2010 00:28 Mayayana used his keyboard to write : >> >> As far aw wsh... blah. After what I've been doing the last couple days >> in powershell 2 - I would never again attempt to use wsh. Wouldn't >> suggest it a first language though :) >> > > Powershell is command line for sys admins. > Glorified DOS, souped up with .Net, designed to > lure anti-GUI Linux geeks to Windows servers. Powershell is a general purpose shell/programming language. > Not very appealing to non-tech people trying to > see a point in programming. Like I said - I wouldn't suggest it for first timmers. -- Tom Shelton
From: Viken Cerpovna on 5 Aug 2010 05:47 "Mike Williams" <Mike(a)WhiskyAndCoke.com> wrote in message news:i38ecf$c0q$1(a)speranza.aioe.org... > "Tom Shelton" <tom_shelton(a)comcast.invalid> wrote in message > news:i3837n$gg3$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... > > > I advise you and the other .NOTTERS to actually read >> the charter of this group. It DOES NOT limit this group >> to classic VB in anyway - > > Of course it doesn't! Are you really that stupid? The charter (if one > actually exists) would have been written long before the dotnet imposter > was first released and whoever wrote that charter had no idea that > Micro$oft would one day release an imposter based on a totally different > programming paradigm and that they would dishonestly continue to apply the > name Visual Basic to it. There is no need for an amendment to the charter, > and anyone with any sense at all who has been using the Visual Basic > newsgroups for any length of time knows exactly which group refers to > which product. Also, the people who do arrive at the wrong group are > usually either newcomers or people who have not previously frequented the > programming newsgroups, and those people will NOT read any charter before > posting, so there is no point in changing it. > > Even Micro$oft themselves realised that their dotnet product was something > new and completely different, which is why Micro$oft created a new and > completely different newsgroup for it on their own servers, and Micro$oft > continued to run their own real Visual Basic newsgroup and their new and > different neswgroup for their new and different product in parallel, > something they had never previously felt the need to do in respect of the > various different versions of the real Visual Basic. > > It is not the newsgroup charter that needs to be changed, it is the name > of the new dotnet product, which is a dishonest and deliberate Micro$oft > ploy to fool people and to capitalise on the popularity of the real Visual > Basic. > > Mike > I asked this question a few weeks ago and never got a straight answer as to why VB.NET is off-topic here. I guess the charade continues. Thanks, Viken
From: Mayayana on 5 Aug 2010 08:14
| I asked this question a few weeks ago and never got a straight answer as to | why VB.NET is off-topic here. I guess the charade continues. | I know you're only here to cause trouble, but since ..Net beginners may end up reading this thread, I'll answer the question seriously. No charade. They're two completely different tools. Here's a good example. I just downloaded some VB.Net code from PlanetSourceCode. (Which has VB code in one category and all .Net code in another category.) This is a simple sub to copy a file: Private Sub copying() Try System.IO.File.Copy(fromPathAndName, toPathAndName) Catch ex As Exception errorException = ex End Try completed = True End Sub That code is completely unusable in VB. There's no System class. There's no IO class. There's no such thing as Catch or Exception or Try. I've been using VB since 1999, but that code makes no sense to me. And that's just copying a file. .Net is for web services, like Java. It was created to compete with Java after Microsoft lost the legal battle and had to remove their illegal version of Java from Windows. At the time everyone was yapping about SOAP and web services. Microsoft, as usual, jumped on the bandwagon. Today .Net is popular and well-regarded within corporate intranet environments. It more unsuitable than ever for use writing Windows software because it has vast dependencies, low efficiency, a design intended for sandboxing, massive memory demands, and poor adaptability to COM. VB is for compiled Windows software. It's COM-centric (as is Windows) and optimized for RAD Windows software development. There was a time when Microsoft was honest about what ..Net was for. The original press release here: http://www.microsoft.com/Presspass/press/2000/jul00/pdcdeliverspr.mspx ....is titled: Microsoft Delivers First .NET Platform Developer Tools for Building Web Services |