|
web
newsgroups
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
"VB (9) Rocks" slide showRan across this (requires Firefox): http://www.pugscode.org/osdc/vb.xul
Done by the developer of a new perl6 runtime called pugs. Information about Visual Basic 9 is here, if you haven't already read about it: http://msdn.microsoft.com/vbasic/future/default.aspx "Doug H" <dou***@gmail.com> wrote in message Actually, that would be B#9... Visual Basic "the language" died with VS6. news:1141748485.282508.244010@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... > Ran across this (requires Firefox): http://www.pugscode.org/osdc/vb.xul >requires< Firefox? That's too bad. They sure know how to limit an audience, >eh? > Done by the developer of a new perl6 runtime called pugs. > > Information about Visual Basic 9 is here, if you haven't already read > about it: > http://msdn.microsoft.com/vbasic/future/default.aspx Besides... I can't imagine why people wouldn't want to call it anything other than what it is.... which is B#. -- Ken Halter - MS-MVP-VB (visiting from VB6 world) - http://www.vbsight.com Please keep all discussions in the groups.. OK. I know I shouldn't, but...I'll bite. What's the deal with calling the
next version of VB "B#"? Is this the disenfranchised VB6 developer version of Microsoft haters' use of "M$"? It may be self evident to you that Visual Basic died with VS6, but those of us who are more than happy with the direction that the language has taken, a little explanation might be needed. - Mitchell S. Honnert Show quoteHide quote "Ken Halter" <Ken_Halter@Use_Sparingly_Hotmail.com> wrote in message news:%23id1augQGHA.1096@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... > "Doug H" <dou***@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:1141748485.282508.244010@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... >> Ran across this (requires Firefox): http://www.pugscode.org/osdc/vb.xul > >>requires< Firefox? That's too bad. They sure know how to limit an >>audience, eh? > >> Done by the developer of a new perl6 runtime called pugs. >> >> Information about Visual Basic 9 is here, if you haven't already read >> about it: >> http://msdn.microsoft.com/vbasic/future/default.aspx > > Actually, that would be B#9... Visual Basic "the language" died with VS6. > Besides... I can't imagine why people wouldn't want to call it anything > other than what it is.... which is B#. > > -- > Ken Halter - MS-MVP-VB (visiting from VB6 world) - http://www.vbsight.com > Please keep all discussions in the groups.. > I'm absoluely not one of those "fashionable MS bashers" and yes, I do love
VB2005 as a language. I use it every day and am still daily amazed by all the new possibilities. Having said that, I do agree with Ken that it is not VB and for one simple reason: The absolute lack of a migration path from VB6 to VB7. The port of our main app from VB6 to the "current VB version" (still in progress) is costing us well over a $100,000. And I'm sure we're not the only ones. This clearly proves that no matter how great VB7/8 is, it is not an upgrade from VB6 but a totally new language instead. A new language deserves a new name, don't you think? Martin Show quoteHide quote "Mitchell S. Honnert" <n***@REMhonnertOVE.com> wrote in message news:O5ctasiQGHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... > OK. I know I shouldn't, but...I'll bite. What's the deal with calling > the next version of VB "B#"? Is this the disenfranchised VB6 developer > version of Microsoft haters' use of "M$"? It may be self evident to you > that Visual Basic died with VS6, but those of us who are more than happy > with the direction that the language has taken, a little explanation might > be needed. > > - Mitchell S. Honnert > > > "Ken Halter" <Ken_Halter@Use_Sparingly_Hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:%23id1augQGHA.1096@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... >> "Doug H" <dou***@gmail.com> wrote in message >> news:1141748485.282508.244010@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... >>> Ran across this (requires Firefox): http://www.pugscode.org/osdc/vb.xul >> >>>requires< Firefox? That's too bad. They sure know how to limit an >>>audience, eh? >> >>> Done by the developer of a new perl6 runtime called pugs. >>> >>> Information about Visual Basic 9 is here, if you haven't already read >>> about it: >>> http://msdn.microsoft.com/vbasic/future/default.aspx >> >> Actually, that would be B#9... Visual Basic "the language" died with VS6. >> Besides... I can't imagine why people wouldn't want to call it anything >> other than what it is.... which is B#. >> >> -- >> Ken Halter - MS-MVP-VB (visiting from VB6 world) - http://www.vbsight.com >> Please keep all discussions in the groups.. >> > >
Show quote
Hide quote
"Martin" <x@y.com> wrote in message Holy smokes... 100k eh? I can easily imagine it costing the company where I news:%23cs9sZjQGHA.5248@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl... > I'm absoluely not one of those "fashionable MS bashers" and yes, I do love > VB2005 as a language. I use it every day and am still daily amazed by all > the new possibilities. > > Having said that, I do agree with Ken that it is not VB and for one simple > reason: The absolute lack of a migration path from VB6 to VB7. The port of > our main app from VB6 to the "current VB version" (still in progress) is > costing us well over a $100,000. And I'm sure we're not the only ones. > This clearly proves that no matter how great VB7/8 is, it is not an > upgrade from VB6 but a totally new language instead. A new language > deserves a new name, don't you think? > > Martin work at least that much... thinking about it, probably 4 times that much. Thinking about it more, that's just the tip of the iceburg. Luckily, we won't be doing anything drastic "all at once". I already have a plan that's going to save me countless hours (at first anyway) in documentation time (every minute I spend in documentation subtracts 2 to 3 minutes from my life <g>) -- Ken Halter - MS-MVP-VB (visiting from VB6 world) - http://www.vbsight.com Please keep all discussions in the groups.. > Having said that, I do agree with Ken that it is not VB and for one simple I don't disagree that the migration path from VB6 to VB.NET is difficult or > reason: The absolute lack of a migration path from VB6 to VB7. [snip] > This clearly proves that no matter how great VB7/8 is, it is not an > upgrade from VB6 but a totally new language instead. A new language > deserves a new name, don't you think? even more difficult than it should be, but I don't see how this has any bearing on the *name* of the language. The cost of your migration is an external factor, not an intrinsic property of the language itself. If you look at the key words and the syntax of VB6 and VB.NET, they're very close. This is why I don't have a problem with calling the .NET versions "Visual Basic". The frameworks in which they live are very different of course, but the basic elements of both versions are basically the same. Having said this, I also didn't have any problem with MS differentiating the .NET version of VB; I just wish that they wouldn't have picked something as stupendously silly as ".NET" to do it. - Mitchell S. Honnert Show quoteHide quote "Martin" <x@y.com> wrote in message news:%23cs9sZjQGHA.5248@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl... > I'm absoluely not one of those "fashionable MS bashers" and yes, I do love > VB2005 as a language. I use it every day and am still daily amazed by all > the new possibilities. > > Having said that, I do agree with Ken that it is not VB and for one simple > reason: The absolute lack of a migration path from VB6 to VB7. The port of > our main app from VB6 to the "current VB version" (still in progress) is > costing us well over a $100,000. And I'm sure we're not the only ones. > This clearly proves that no matter how great VB7/8 is, it is not an > upgrade from VB6 but a totally new language instead. A new language > deserves a new name, don't you think? > > Martin > > "Mitchell S. Honnert" <n***@REMhonnertOVE.com> wrote in message > news:O5ctasiQGHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... >> OK. I know I shouldn't, but...I'll bite. What's the deal with calling >> the next version of VB "B#"? Is this the disenfranchised VB6 developer >> version of Microsoft haters' use of "M$"? It may be self evident to you >> that Visual Basic died with VS6, but those of us who are more than happy >> with the direction that the language has taken, a little explanation >> might be needed. >> >> - Mitchell S. Honnert >> >> >> "Ken Halter" <Ken_Halter@Use_Sparingly_Hotmail.com> wrote in message >> news:%23id1augQGHA.1096@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... >>> "Doug H" <dou***@gmail.com> wrote in message >>> news:1141748485.282508.244010@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com... >>>> Ran across this (requires Firefox): http://www.pugscode.org/osdc/vb.xul >>> >>>>requires< Firefox? That's too bad. They sure know how to limit an >>>>audience, eh? >>> >>>> Done by the developer of a new perl6 runtime called pugs. >>>> >>>> Information about Visual Basic 9 is here, if you haven't already read >>>> about it: >>>> http://msdn.microsoft.com/vbasic/future/default.aspx >>> >>> Actually, that would be B#9... Visual Basic "the language" died with >>> VS6. Besides... I can't imagine why people wouldn't want to call it >>> anything other than what it is.... which is B#. >>> >>> -- >>> Ken Halter - MS-MVP-VB (visiting from VB6 world) - >>> http://www.vbsight.com >>> Please keep all discussions in the groups.. >>> >> >> > > On Wed, 8 Mar 2006 06:28:11 +0800, "Martin" <x@y.com> wrote: ¤ I'm absoluely not one of those "fashionable MS bashers" and yes, I do love ¤ VB2005 as a language. I use it every day and am still daily amazed by all ¤ the new possibilities. ¤ ¤ Having said that, I do agree with Ken that it is not VB and for one simple ¤ reason: The absolute lack of a migration path from VB6 to VB7. The port of ¤ our main app from VB6 to the "current VB version" (still in progress) is ¤ costing us well over a $100,000. And I'm sure we're not the only ones. This ¤ clearly proves that no matter how great VB7/8 is, it is not an upgrade from ¤ VB6 but a totally new language instead. A new language deserves a new name, ¤ don't you think? ¤ ¤ Martin How can it be a new language when it still uses a high percentage of the BASIC language? Did they rename COBOL when OO features were added? Paul ~~~~ Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic) "Paul Clement" <UseAdddressAtEndofMess***@swspectrum.com> wrote in message Adding OO to COBOL is surely like putting lipstick on a cow. Does the cow news:v60u02tsv3em86vffcb8e9oarocfi5qnbs@4ax.com... > How can it be a new language when it still uses a high percentage of the > BASIC language? > > Did they rename COBOL when OO features were added? get a new name? Paul,
I agree with Homer, Cobol is basicly an non even driven language. Therefore any change to keep it alive is in my opinion the same as keeping a (coal) steam train alive. Just my opinion. Cor I have never seen this spruced up cobol, so I can't tell, but... There was a
time that basic wasn't event driven either, so anything is possible I guess Show quoteHide quote "Cor Ligthert [MVP]" <notmyfirstn***@planet.nl> wrote in message news:uiwN%23P0QGHA.5080@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl... > Paul, > > I agree with Homer, > > Cobol is basicly an non even driven language. > > Therefore any change to keep it alive is in my opinion the same as keeping > a (coal) steam train alive. > > Just my opinion. > > Cor > "Mitchell S. Honnert" <n***@REMhonnertOVE.com> wrote in message I guess I left off the part where I should've said "and I never said B# is a news:O5ctasiQGHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... > OK. I know I shouldn't, but...I'll bite. What's the deal with calling > the next version of VB "B#"? Is this the disenfranchised VB6 developer > version of Microsoft haters' use of "M$"? It may be self evident to you > that Visual Basic died with VS6, but those of us who are more than happy > with the direction that the language has taken, a little explanation might > be needed. > > - Mitchell S. Honnert bad thing". NET Software Legend Juval Lowy agrees with that too, saying the only thing VB6 has in common with VB.Net is the letters "V" and "B" in their names. You can hear that in the following podcast.... Note that he also uses B# as the name of this entirely new language. It's not meant to be a put down. It's a new name for a new language. Simple as that. And it should've started with the very first release. VB6 Glass Ceiling http://blogs.duncanmackenzie.net/duncanma/archive/2005/10/28/3148.aspx ....and, about the "disenfranchised VB6 developer version" comment... hmmm.... nope. I'm not disenfranchised... no one took away my right to vote. (http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=disenfranchised)... and, lemme see now.... I still have a job so that can't be the problem.... hmmm... I may have to get back with you on that. MS Hater? I don't think so. Yup... You knew you shouldn't but....... -- Ken Halter - MS-MVP-VB (visiting from VB6 world) - http://www.vbsight.com Please keep all discussions in the groups.. "Ken Halter" <Ken_Hal***@Hotmail.com> wrote in message Not a 'bad thing' but.... the syntax below is an improvement? "For Each news:e0ZG7TnQGHA.1264@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl... > > I guess I left off the part where I should've said "and I never said B# is > a bad thing". > Dim"? Gimme a break. Talk about an easy way to overlook a variable declaration. Sheesh. From (http://msdn.microsoft.com/vbasic/future/default.aspx?pull=/library/en-us/dnvs05/html/vb9overview.asp#vb9overview_topic3) For Each Dim Country In SmallCountries Console.WriteLine(Country.Name) Next ....and "Implicitly Typed Local Variables" is new? Can't be. I've been using them in VB3/4/5/6 for years. -- Ken Halter - MS-MVP-VB (visiting from VB6 world) - http://www.vbsight.com Please keep all discussions in the groups.. See, the thing is, Microsoft _owns_ Visual Basic.
They can make a new version that isn't backward compatible if they want. It's vendor lock-in (or lock-out, however you want to look at it). You don't have to worry about that so much with java or C# or C++ or javascript, because they are standardized. There are multiple compilers for those languages (even with C# there is mono's mcs/bmcs). They should develop a standard for VB 9, but it has so many features, I'm not sure how easy that would be. But for Microsoft to port VB6 to .NET without making any backwards- incompatible changes, that would be stupid (I don't believe anyone else has done it, either). Firstly because people can still use VB6 as is, and also .NET is focused more on security and OOP. Visual Basic .NET is a great adaptation of VB to .NET, but again standardization would be nice. Ken Halter wrote:
> ...and "Implicitly Typed Local Variables" is new? Can't be. I've been using Variants aren't implicitly typed, they are untyped.> them in VB3/4/5/6 for years. > (visiting from VB6 world) One has to wonder why, given how much you don't like it here.-- Larry Lard Replies to group please > VB6 has in common with VB.Net is the letters "V" and "B" in their names. This is easily-disproven hyperbole. It may have gotten a laugh out of the podcast listeners, but there are dozens if not hundreds of similarities between the two "languages". > It's a new name for a new language. Simple as that. And it should've Well, it *did* have a new name; they tacked on the silly ".NET" suffix to > started with the very first release. VB. I know that your argument is that it shouldn't have included the words "Visual Basic" at all, but my argument is that there are so many similarities that the naming is justified. (I'm glad that MS is dropping the whole .NET suffix from VB. It's served its purpose.) > ...and, about the "disenfranchised VB6 developer version" comment... OK, you know a discussion is devolving when the participants are quibbling > hmmm.... nope. I'm not disenfranchised... no one took away my right to > vote. over word definitions, but you may want to check another source for "disenfranchised". Try www.m-w.com. You'll find the meaning I had in mind. - Mitchell S. Honnert Show quoteHide quote "Ken Halter" <Ken_Hal***@Hotmail.com> wrote in message news:e0ZG7TnQGHA.1264@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl... > "Mitchell S. Honnert" <n***@REMhonnertOVE.com> wrote in message > news:O5ctasiQGHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... >> OK. I know I shouldn't, but...I'll bite. What's the deal with calling >> the next version of VB "B#"? Is this the disenfranchised VB6 developer >> version of Microsoft haters' use of "M$"? It may be self evident to you >> that Visual Basic died with VS6, but those of us who are more than happy >> with the direction that the language has taken, a little explanation >> might be needed. >> >> - Mitchell S. Honnert > > I guess I left off the part where I should've said "and I never said B# is > a bad thing". > > NET Software Legend Juval Lowy agrees with that too, saying the only thing > VB6 has in common with VB.Net is the letters "V" and "B" in their names. > You > can hear that in the following podcast.... Note that he also uses B# as > the name of this entirely new language. It's not meant to be a put down. > It's a new name for a new language. Simple as that. And it should've > started with the very first release. > > VB6 Glass Ceiling > http://blogs.duncanmackenzie.net/duncanma/archive/2005/10/28/3148.aspx > ...and, about the "disenfranchised VB6 developer version" comment... > hmmm.... nope. I'm not disenfranchised... no one took away my right to > vote. (http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=disenfranchised)... and, > lemme see now.... I still have a job so that can't be the problem.... > hmmm... I may have to get back with you on that. > > MS Hater? I don't think so. > > Yup... You knew you shouldn't but....... > > -- > Ken Halter - MS-MVP-VB (visiting from VB6 world) - http://www.vbsight.com > Please keep all discussions in the groups.. > > Ken,
This is for me the same as that the Americans are speaking English, while there are so many words different and the language is in many cases different used. The (Boeren) people in South Africa are not speaking Dutch they speak Afrikaans. Although it is in language specifications called a "Dutch Language". You think it would be better if the language from the Americans was Americish? In my opinion is this in the same order as in VB6 and VBNet. VBNet behaves however more than C, but luckily for sure not completely. The same as the Americans have taken a lot form other languages than English or changed English words, but for sure not the most part. Just my idea. Cor Show quoteHide quote "Ken Halter" <Ken_Hal***@Hotmail.com> schreef in bericht news:e0ZG7TnQGHA.1264@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl... > "Mitchell S. Honnert" <n***@REMhonnertOVE.com> wrote in message > news:O5ctasiQGHA.3916@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl... >> OK. I know I shouldn't, but...I'll bite. What's the deal with calling >> the next version of VB "B#"? Is this the disenfranchised VB6 developer >> version of Microsoft haters' use of "M$"? It may be self evident to you >> that Visual Basic died with VS6, but those of us who are more than happy >> with the direction that the language has taken, a little explanation >> might be needed. >> >> - Mitchell S. Honnert > > I guess I left off the part where I should've said "and I never said B# is > a bad thing". > > NET Software Legend Juval Lowy agrees with that too, saying the only thing > VB6 has in common with VB.Net is the letters "V" and "B" in their names. > You > can hear that in the following podcast.... Note that he also uses B# as > the name of this entirely new language. It's not meant to be a put down. > It's a new name for a new language. Simple as that. And it should've > started with the very first release. > > VB6 Glass Ceiling > http://blogs.duncanmackenzie.net/duncanma/archive/2005/10/28/3148.aspx > ...and, about the "disenfranchised VB6 developer version" comment... > hmmm.... nope. I'm not disenfranchised... no one took away my right to > vote. (http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=disenfranchised)... and, > lemme see now.... I still have a job so that can't be the problem.... > hmmm... I may have to get back with you on that. > > MS Hater? I don't think so. > > Yup... You knew you shouldn't but....... > > -- > Ken Halter - MS-MVP-VB (visiting from VB6 world) - http://www.vbsight.com > Please keep all discussions in the groups.. > > Ken Halter wrote:
> Actually, that would be B#9... Visual Basic "the language" died with You can't have B# as there is already a B programming language ;-)> VS6. Besides... I can't imagine why people wouldn't want to call it > anything other than what it is.... which is B#. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B_programming_language The next available letter appears to be H. Andrew "Andrew Morton" <a**@in-press.co.uk.invalid> wrote in message Well... "B" looks a bit like C-Flat <g> at least it's readable <g> B#'s news:uNVivqpQGHA.2300@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl... > > You can't have B# as there is already a B programming language ;-) > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B_programming_language > > The next available letter appears to be H. > > Andrew still my choice. -- Ken Halter - MS-MVP-VB (visiting from VB6 world) - http://www.vbsight.com Please keep all discussions in the groups.. Ken Halter wrote:
> "Andrew Morton" <a**@in-press.co.uk.invalid> wrote in message I knew there was a reason B# struck a chord: there's a group called the B > news:uNVivqpQGHA.2300@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl... >> >> You can't have B# as there is already a B programming language ;-) >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B_programming_language >> >> The next available letter appears to be H. >> >> Andrew > > Well... "B" looks a bit like C-Flat <g> at least it's readable <g> > B#'s still my choice. Sharps:- http://www.slipups.com/items/2859.html <g> So, moving on from VB, VC is sort-of already taken, how about... err, maybe not :o Andrew 
Other interesting topics
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
