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: Viken Cerpovna on 5 Aug 2010 22:01 "Mayayana" <mayayana(a)invalid.nospam> wrote in message news:i3e9sq$7qe$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... >| 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 I appreciate your honest response and I don't disagree with most of it. But it is Visual Basic and there was no explanation as to why it's off topic. Sounds like it's off topic because a bunch of people here don't like what Microsoft did with the product. The fact that it's different than its predecessor or you don't like it isn't sufficient reason to exclude it. Viken
From: Viken Cerpovna on 5 Aug 2010 22:18 "Henning" <computer_hero(a)coldmail.com> wrote in message news:i3bbvo$hn$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... > The microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.vb is still available, why not use > it? There are numerous posts clarifying how to continue to use the > dotnet.languages groups. But ofcause *if* you are a MS troll, no servers > exept Microsoft's exist. > > /Henning Which got me thinking. For those concerned about Visual Basic .NET questions being asked and answered here, there's always microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion, which is exclusively for older outdated versions of Visual Basic. This group of course is not and never has been. Viken
From: Henning on 6 Aug 2010 07:29 "Viken Cerpovna" <viken(a)spam.com> skrev i meddelandet news:i3frdl$jor$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... > "Henning" <computer_hero(a)coldmail.com> wrote in message > news:i3bbvo$hn$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... >> The microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.vb is still available, why not use >> it? There are numerous posts clarifying how to continue to use the >> dotnet.languages groups. But ofcause *if* you are a MS troll, no servers >> exept Microsoft's exist. >> >> /Henning > > > Which got me thinking. For those concerned about Visual Basic .NET > questions being asked and answered here, there's always > microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion, which is exclusively for older > outdated versions of Visual Basic. > > This group of course is not and never has been. > > Viken > > Is this resource hunger for space, MS forums, dotnet.languages and lately this group a reflection of the physical resource hunger of the language? /Henning
From: Thorsten Albers on 6 Aug 2010 07:32 Access Developer <accdevel(a)gmail.com> schrieb im Beitrag <8c103iF5cvU1(a)mid.individual.net>... > The Big 8 Management Committee / Group, which has its own newsgroup, is in > charge now. If anyone wants the charter changed, or, better yet, a new > VB.NET newsgroup created, that's where to start. I used to subscribe to that > newsgroup but when I changed news servers did not resubscribe, and have > forgotten the exact name. But searching should reveal all. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_8_(Usenet) is a good place to start. -- Thorsten Albers albers (a) uni-freiburg.de
From: Mayayana on 6 Aug 2010 09:26
| But | it is Visual Basic and there was no explanation as to why it's off topic. | Sounds like it's off topic because a bunch of people here don't like what | Microsoft did with the product. The fact that it's different than its | predecessor or you don't like it isn't sufficient reason to exclude it. | Microsoft didn't do anything with the product. They discontinued the product. Then they came out with VB.Net. Then they dropped the ".Net". That was a marketing ploy. This whole argument is centering around a technicality -- the claim that VB.Net is VB because MS says it is. Microsoft made the name change precisely for that reason -- to help erase VB from history. They tried the same thing with C++, coming out with the ridiculously named C++/CLI. http://www.regdeveloper.co.uk/2006/05/05/cplusplus_cli/ At this point it doesn't matter whether people resent Microsoft's direction, whether they resent that MS dropped VB, whether they love .Net. ...It doesn't even matter, directly, that MS is pulling a scam by calling VB.Net VB. What matters is that we can't reasonably discuss two different things in one group. That's what my entire post was about. It was detailing *the* reason that VB.Net is OT! An analogous situation would be a group with a name something like misc.tornado.research -- a meteorology discusson about tornadoes. Then GM comes out with a Chevy Tornado and suddenly car buffs start showing up. No one benefits from fighting over that. Sure Chevy has a right to name their car whatever they want to. Sure the group name says "tornado". So what? That's just the Emperor's new logic. |