If you had to move from VB6...
in [Visual Basic]
|
Prev: Ever had to judge a new to-be-hired in interview ? REPOST
Next: Multiple Combo Boxes Highlighted - Solved
From: bitshifter on 15 Feb 2010 13:27 The eternal sparkle of the clean zen post ;-) On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 08:58:03 -0800, Tom Shelton <tom_shelton(a)comcastXXXXXXX.net> wrote: >On 2010-02-15, mayayana <mayayana(a)nospam.invalid> wrote: >>> >>> I came up with RealBasic, Delphi (though I heard it's on the way out), >>> maybe C# (but I would try to keep away from M$ stuff), and not Java. >>> >> >> Why maybe C# and not Java? C# was designed >> to compete with Java. They're both semi-sandboxed, >> OO, JIT-compiled systems running on a VM and >> designed for server-side/intranet applets. >> >> Isn't the question, really, whether you want to go >> along with a sandboxed OS -- Microsoft's planned future >> of software as a service? Maybe a future where you >> might shortly have to buy webhosting on Azure and >> get approval in order for your software to run on >> Windows? One can be for or against that, but it >> seems important to go into it with eyes open. .Nxt >> is the Java-fying of the Windows API. It's a radical >> new direction. >> >> There have been several discussions of various >> 3rd-party Basics here in the past. I can never >> keep track of them all, and most (including the >> Linux-based attempts) seem to have the fatal flaw >> that they see all Basic coders as glorified scripters >> who need everything encased in safe wrappers. They >> equate verbose code with stupidity. (What I like >> to think of as "Perl syndrome". :) >> >> I think Nobody posted a comprehensive list at >> one point. Maybe he'll share that again. >> >> >> > > >-- >Tom Shelton
From: bitshifter on 15 Feb 2010 13:28 Thanks, Nobody. I'll give it a look-see and maybe test it. On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 11:48:08 -0500, "Nobody" <nobody(a)nobody.com> wrote: ><bitshifter(a)sympatico.ca> wrote in message >news:4b79674f.1840625(a)news.newshosting.com... >> What do you think ? > >KBasic is the closest to VB6 out there, but I am not sure how many are using >it now. It's 100% VB6 code compatible according to the author. It's written >in VC 2008. It uses Qt as GUI kit and it's multi platform open source, and >can create EXE's without dependency on any runtime. It will probably replace >VB6 after many start to use it or contribute to it's development. Because it >uses Qt as GUI, the hard part is converting VB6 forms. I haven't installed >it, so I don't know how easy to develop with it. > >http://www.kbasic.com >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qt_%28framework%29 > >The site seems to be down at the moment, so here is the Internet Archive >version: > >http://web.archive.org/web/20080507023915rn_1/www.kbasic.com/doku.php > >
From: Tom Shelton on 15 Feb 2010 13:40 On 2010-02-15, mayayana <mayayana(a)nospam.invalid> wrote: >> >> -- >> Tom Shelton > > Do you realize how often you post nothing? > I'm never sure whether it's meant to be some > sort of Zennie trip, or whether you just get > so worked up that you forget to paste your > post. :) > > It's a slip of the fingers. I started to reply - then though better about it. I just hit the wrong key. -- Tom Shelton
From: Ralph on 15 Feb 2010 13:41 <bitshifter(a)sympatico.ca> wrote in message news:4b79674f.1840625(a)news.newshosting.com... > In another thread, someone said that compared to VB Fred, VB6 was > pathetic. > > This low attempt to turn me from my private choice of language slid > off my back like water on a duck. > > However, it did pique my curiosity. > > If I had to move from VB6, which language would I choose. > Which language would most resemble it in IDE, ease of coding and, yes, > RAD quality. > Surprisingly. Delphi most resembles the 'Visual Basic Windows Development" (vb5/6) product in terms of the IDE, ease of coding, and RAD. But that is a whole new language. > I would accept a learning curve about the same I had to go through > with VB6. About a hundred hours to get a simple database program > running (from picking up the course book) and about a year or two to > get moderatly proficient in it. > Then Delphi would be it. Learning or rather re-learning will be quicker since you already know the basics. [I don't use Delphi myself. This is just a personal observation from watching many teams go that direction.] > I came up with RealBasic, Delphi (though I heard it's on the way out), > maybe C# (but I would try to keep away from M$ stuff), and not Java. > [PS: Delphi HAS always been on its way out. <g>] Unfortunately none of the BASICs would rank as a "step-forward". (IMHO) All are either a "C-ish" front-end, or a 90's BASIC, ie, no real improvement on 'features'. "VB.Net" is only a BASIC-esque front-end for .Net Framework Development. MS merely coop'd the name "Visual Basic" just as they did for Visual Basic for DOS. DotNet is an entirely different ballgame. You will spend your 100+ hours learning the Framework. > What do you think ? Forget the actual language. The real question is what development package do you want to use? Or look at it this way. Migrating to vb.net because you used VB6 is a terrible reason. But migrating to vb.net because you want to stay with MS's development packages is a good reason. (With MS is now dotNet or the Highway) But in that case why bother with VB.Net and just use VC++ and C# (unless funny punctuation and case-sensitivity annoys you). If you want to avoid MS on Windows then it is C++ or Java - but doing Java on Windows, with the limited toolset (again IMHO), is just plain making it tougher on yourself. It is like doing COM on Linix - sure it can be done, but why? Spend your days playing with tools that are "as good as ...". Hell who wants to be *just* as good as? <g> And now here is where I really get flamed... <g> Frankly, if you want to avoid MS, then avoid Windows. It's their world and they call all the shots - get used to it or leave. Whine, wimper, b*tch or cry - at the end of the day - no one cares, especially not MS. -ralph
From: Michel Posseth [MCP] on 15 Feb 2010 14:52
My simple question would be why would you move ? I do not see anny good reassons to abandon VB6 for a product that can`t completly replace VB6 why can we have a C++ version in Visual studio .Net that can run without the FW and not a reall Visual Basic version that can do the same ? IMHO : MS should have created a Visual basic version in Visual studio that would give the developer the choice to use .Net or not Currently i code in both and despite that some people like to believe the learning curve isn`t that high, back and forward just buy yourself the Balena books and you are up in a few hours going up or down ( VB.Net to VB6 or VB6 to VB.Net ) HTH Michel <bitshifter(a)sympatico.ca> schreef in bericht news:4b79674f.1840625(a)news.newshosting.com... > In another thread, someone said that compared to VB Fred, VB6 was > pathetic. > > This low attempt to turn me from my private choice of language slid > off my back like water on a duck. > > However, it did pique my curiosity. > > If I had to move from VB6, which language would I choose. > Which language would most resemble it in IDE, ease of coding and, yes, > RAD quality. > > I would accept a learning curve about the same I had to go through > with VB6. About a hundred hours to get a simple database program > running (from picking up the course book) and about a year or two to > get moderatly proficient in it. > > I came up with RealBasic, Delphi (though I heard it's on the way out), > maybe C# (but I would try to keep away from M$ stuff), and not Java. > > What do you think ? |