Conversion vb6 to VB 2008 Express
in [VB.NET]
|
From: Mike Williams on 26 Sep 2009 08:01 "Cor Ligthert[MVP]" <Notmyfirstname(a)planet.nl> wrote in message news:%23BuPb2pPKHA.1280(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > Despite what others say, if you want at the end a > program that is 10 times faster then VB6 (what is > possible with VB for Net) . . . Put your money where your mouth is fatty. And change that picture on your MVP profile. You look like a child molester with his head on upside down.
From: Family Tree Mike on 26 Sep 2009 08:41 George W. Barrowcliff wrote: > I have an application developed by someone else using VB6 that needs a few > changes. Last guy is gone, so is VB6 environment. > I downloaded and installed 2008 Express, then converted application. > If you want to upgrade your code to VB.net, then it will be easier to learn and recode with VB Express from scatch, keeping the look and algorithms from previous code. If you want to go with VB 6, please move the question there as there (Microsoft.Public.VB.General.Discussion). Many of the posts in this thread from VB 6 zealots, though unproductive in this group, may be from posters with reasonable advice when asked in the vb6 group. -- Mike
From: C on 26 Sep 2009 10:20 On 26 syys, 15:41, Family Tree Mike <FamilyTreeM...(a)ThisOldHouse.com> wrote: > George W. Barrowcliff wrote: > > I have an application developed by someone else using VB6 that needs a few > > changes. Last guy is gone, so is VB6 environment. > > I downloaded and installed 2008 Express, then converted application. > > If you want to upgrade your code to VB.net, then it will be easier to > learn and recode with VB Express from scatch, keeping the look and > algorithms from previous code. I am in a similar situation, except that the decision is made: VB.net will be used in future. Over the last 14 years, thousands of lines of VB3-6 code has been written, almost all of which is in use. I wonder how long it could take to recode and not convert all of that. I cannot work full time as a programmer. On the other hand, most of my VB6 code is relatively simple - no databases, no communications with other programs or too many APIs. There is just graphics, mostly plots of 4 kinds. Is recoding a feasible option? Any estimate on how many weeks, months or years it could take me? I wonder how many months it will take me to learn "enough" of VB.net. > > If you want to go with VB 6, please move the question there as there > (Microsoft.Public.VB.General.Discussion). Many of the posts in this > thread from VB 6 zealots, though unproductive in this group, may be from > posters with reasonable advice when asked in the vb6 group. > > -- > Mike
From: Ato_Zee on 26 Sep 2009 11:00 > Yes, going back to VB6 would be your best bet. It's still a very viable > language without all the silly .Nxt BS that is really irrelevant. I could > probably hook you up with a free copy. At least one legit sealed VB6 authentic MS$ VB6 on eBay. Horror of horrors, but seriously, there are some copies of VB6 offered on Pirate Bay. http://thepiratebay.org/ You may have to carefully choose the download, look at the comments and how many seeders, one looks a viable well seeded download. Virus scan it first with a good anti-virus. Use a spare machine to work on if you have one, for things off PB. There are many books on VB6 on eBay. VB6 is pretty easy to get up to speed on if you remember the old days of TRS Basic, GW Basic, BBC Basic, it uses much the same language and constructs with a few tweaks.
From: Scott M. on 26 Sep 2009 11:06
I own and operate an IT training company and am faced with this question all the time. The fact is that VB 6 developers coming to .NET very often have a harder time, in some respects, than people who have no prior programming experience. This is because of the incorrect impression that VB .NET is just VB 6, with new features. That's not the case at all. As I mentioned in an earler post VB .NET is a new language that runs on a completely different runtime than VB 6.0. But, because (on the surface) VB 6 can look similiar to VB .NET, many folks get the incorrect perception that they know enough VB 6.0 to just jump into VB .NET and get stuff done (and done correctly!). This is false. You should move to .NET because it's already got 8 years of a track record as the successor to VB 6 and because it is much more in line with other modern OO languages. Those who tell you that VB 6 still has its place for new application development, are just plain misinformed and/or uneducated about what .NET is all about. I can't tell you how long it would take you to "convert" your VB 6 apps., becuase, in many cases, a complete rewrite would be necessary, in order to reap the full benefits of .NET. Take it from someone who has made the transition as well as teaches others how to make the transition, start learning .NET with your eyes wide open and don't assume that you know how somthing should be done or how something works because of your VB 6 experience. I can say that after 6 months of learning and practicing with VB .NET, you should begin to "get it" in terms of how .NET differs from VB 6 (and other forms of classic Windows and Internet) programming. Just a couple of quick examples: This method declaration works in both VB 6 and in VB .NET, but it works differently in .NET than in VB 6: Public Sub Foo(x As String) In VB 6, when you didn't specify how a parameter should be passed, it was passed ByRef by default. In .NET, all parameters are passed ByVal by default. Not knowing that simple change could dramatically affect your code. Here's another one: If x = 7 And y = 8 Then... In VB 6, you may be surprised to find, that even if x is not 7, the VB 6 runtime would still evaluate the y = 8 portion of the If statement. And, it will do that as well in VB .NET! But, VB .NET adds the AndAlso keyword to make the statement only need to look at the first portion of the test and if it is false, then the second portion will be skipped. When you convert something like this to VB .NET, the converter won't change your And to AndAlso and the code will compile and run, but it won't be taking advantage of the performance gain of AndAlso. These are just two simple examples of code that *works* in both VB 6 and VB ..NET, but if you don't understand the inner workings of VB .NET, you'll not be taking adavantage of all the language has to offer and you'll have converted for no good reason. Take the time to learn .NET from the ground up and you'll never go back to VB 6 again. -Scott "C" <wrong.address.1(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:0deb3ba7-9af8-4eef-85bb-e86fb18bbc4e(a)f33g2000vbm.googlegroups.com... On 26 syys, 15:41, Family Tree Mike <FamilyTreeM...(a)ThisOldHouse.com> wrote: > George W. Barrowcliff wrote: > > I have an application developed by someone else using VB6 that needs a > > few > > changes. Last guy is gone, so is VB6 environment. > > I downloaded and installed 2008 Express, then converted application. > > If you want to upgrade your code to VB.net, then it will be easier to > learn and recode with VB Express from scatch, keeping the look and > algorithms from previous code. I am in a similar situation, except that the decision is made: VB.net will be used in future. Over the last 14 years, thousands of lines of VB3-6 code has been written, almost all of which is in use. I wonder how long it could take to recode and not convert all of that. I cannot work full time as a programmer. On the other hand, most of my VB6 code is relatively simple - no databases, no communications with other programs or too many APIs. There is just graphics, mostly plots of 4 kinds. Is recoding a feasible option? Any estimate on how many weeks, months or years it could take me? I wonder how many months it will take me to learn "enough" of VB.net. > > If you want to go with VB 6, please move the question there as there > (Microsoft.Public.VB.General.Discussion). Many of the posts in this > thread from VB 6 zealots, though unproductive in this group, may be from > posters with reasonable advice when asked in the vb6 group. > > -- > Mike |