"Crouchie1998" <crouchie1998@spamcop.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:uFORo8SPFHA.2748@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> Not really a VB.NET question
>
> Search http://www.google.com for "OOPS"
>
> Crouchie1998
> BA (HONS) MCP MCSE
>
>

"bingomanatee" <edelh***@manateebay.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:1113073304.915525.117590@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> coming a bit late to the party are we?
>
> I would say first off that VB.net and C# are both pretty complete
> implementations of OOP. Although VB definately allows for old style
> procedural code in places, OOP is pretty well spelled out in VB.NET.
>
> OOP includes a few basic concepts.
> * representing elements as self contained collections of data
> (variables, nouns) and methods (subs, actions) that can be used to
> allow objects to interact.
> * Allowing objects to be created based on "Platonic" object types
> (templates) or to be specializations of more generic "Prototypes"(elkis
> to mammal), carrying along the basic qualities that define the
> prototype. (the elk has fur, but not all mammals have horns).
> *Allowing objects to be treated in similar ways based on their
> prototypes (if you can skin or eat a mammal, you can skin or eat an
> elk).
>
> VB.NET pretty much has a check in every box.
>
> If you want more detail on Object Theory, pick up a book on UML or read
> the introduction to pretty much every programming book on VB, C#, or
> Java. (you can do this at the bookstore. the concept's not that
> expansive.)
>
> It is actually pretty difficult to find a language nowadays that is NOT
> object oriented in some way. If you want a counterpoint to hammer the
> concept home, check out PHP. It does have allowances for objects, but
> the vast majority of PHP applicaitions use basic variables and arrays
> and functions, which is a proceedural approach. This will probably
> change after PHP 5 is established (or maybe 6 -- the PHP crowd is
> pretty entrenched in procedural code).
>
> JavaScript is another popular example of a language which does not
> force OOP methodology on you. You can access objects that reflect the
> web pages' information and (though this is not emphasized in the
> documentation) define and use custom objects with JavaScript, the
> latter is in practice rare.
>
> NOW: a few myths to bust:
> Object Oriented Code does NOT solve problems in and of itself. It is a
> framework for rethinking your task and defining it a more real world
> based paradigm, but you can create bad code in OOP just like you can in
> procedural code. OOP will not save you from yourself.
>
> OOP does NOT save you time... at least in the beginning. It may take
> longer to define a task in an object oriented paradigm than to crunch
> out some procedural code, but if you plan to live with your codebase
> for any amount of time, you will find it time worth spending.
>
> Back to my previous example, most PHP coders can beat the pants out of
> an OOP team in terms of benchmarks for simple projects. This in some
> contexts makes PHP a "better" language for handling simple tasks like
> form processing, SQL reporting and other basic tasks. Object Oriented
> coding does have a certain amount of "Overhead".
>
> That being said, the VB environment is absolutely hands down the best
> IDE I have ever seen for any language in the last 12 years and if you
> are not already entrenched in a coding language, it is a great place to
> begin your exploration of Object Oriented coding.
>

"Philipp" <Philipp_Guf***@yahoo.de> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:42582a32$1@e-post.inode.at...
> Hey, thanks very much, for your answer, it helps me a lot.
> Currently I am writing program code in VB6.0 and Cobol, but also in C. Do
> you think that VB.net is good example for a oop-language or is "vb.net
oop"
> different from the origanilly concept?
>
> thanks very very much
>
> best wishes.
> "bingomanatee" <edelh***@manateebay.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> news:1113073304.915525.117590@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > coming a bit late to the party are we?
> >
> > I would say first off that VB.net and C# are both pretty complete
> > implementations of OOP. Although VB definately allows for old style
> > procedural code in places, OOP is pretty well spelled out in VB.NET.
> >
> > OOP includes a few basic concepts.
> > * representing elements as self contained collections of data
> > (variables, nouns) and methods (subs, actions) that can be used to
> > allow objects to interact.
> > * Allowing objects to be created based on "Platonic" object types
> > (templates) or to be specializations of more generic "Prototypes"(elkis
> > to mammal), carrying along the basic qualities that define the
> > prototype. (the elk has fur, but not all mammals have horns).
> > *Allowing objects to be treated in similar ways based on their
> > prototypes (if you can skin or eat a mammal, you can skin or eat an
> > elk).
> >
> > VB.NET pretty much has a check in every box.
> >
> > If you want more detail on Object Theory, pick up a book on UML or read
> > the introduction to pretty much every programming book on VB, C#, or
> > Java. (you can do this at the bookstore. the concept's not that
> > expansive.)
> >
> > It is actually pretty difficult to find a language nowadays that is NOT
> > object oriented in some way. If you want a counterpoint to hammer the
> > concept home, check out PHP. It does have allowances for objects, but
> > the vast majority of PHP applicaitions use basic variables and arrays
> > and functions, which is a proceedural approach. This will probably
> > change after PHP 5 is established (or maybe 6 -- the PHP crowd is
> > pretty entrenched in procedural code).
> >
> > JavaScript is another popular example of a language which does not
> > force OOP methodology on you. You can access objects that reflect the
> > web pages' information and (though this is not emphasized in the
> > documentation) define and use custom objects with JavaScript, the
> > latter is in practice rare.
> >
> > NOW: a few myths to bust:
> > Object Oriented Code does NOT solve problems in and of itself. It is a
> > framework for rethinking your task and defining it a more real world
> > based paradigm, but you can create bad code in OOP just like you can in
> > procedural code. OOP will not save you from yourself.
> >
> > OOP does NOT save you time... at least in the beginning. It may take
> > longer to define a task in an object oriented paradigm than to crunch
> > out some procedural code, but if you plan to live with your codebase
> > for any amount of time, you will find it time worth spending.
> >
> > Back to my previous example, most PHP coders can beat the pants out of
> > an OOP team in terms of benchmarks for simple projects. This in some
> > contexts makes PHP a "better" language for handling simple tasks like
> > form processing, SQL reporting and other basic tasks. Object Oriented
> > coding does have a certain amount of "Overhead".
> >
> > That being said, the VB environment is absolutely hands down the best
> > IDE I have ever seen for any language in the last 12 years and if you
> > are not already entrenched in a coding language, it is a great place to
> > begin your exploration of Object Oriented coding.
> >
>
>

"Herfried K. Wagner [MVP]" <hirf-spam-me-here@gmx.at> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:uHDtpCUPFHA.3296@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> "Philipp" <Philipp_Guf***@yahoo.de> schrieb:
> > Hey, thanks very much, for your answer, it helps me a lot.
> > Currently I am writing program code in VB6.0 and Cobol, but also in C.
Do
> > you think that VB.net is good example for a oop-language or is "vb.net
> > oop"
> > different from the origanilly concept?
>
> VB.NET is a PIE language, which means that it implements the OO concepts
> polymorphism, inheritance, and encapsulation.  Yes, VB.NET is a good
example
> for a modern, object-oriented programming language.
>
> --
>  M S   Herfried K. Wagner
> M V P  <URL:http://dotnet.mvps.org/>
>  V B   <URL:http://classicvb.org/petition/>
>

"Herfried K. Wagner [MVP]" <hirf-spam-me-here@gmx.at> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:OkHjkoUPFHA.2728@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> "Philipp" <Philipp_Guf***@yahoo.de> schrieb:
> > How hard is the change from Visual Basic 6.0 to VB.net?
>
> That's hard to say, because it strongly depends on your familiarity with
OO.
> However, it's a huge change, technically VB.NET is not a successor of VB6.
>
> --
>  M S   Herfried K. Wagner
> M V P  <URL:http://dotnet.mvps.org/>
>  V B   <URL:http://classicvb.org/petition/>
>

"Herfried K. Wagner [MVP]" <hirf-spam-me-here@gmx.at> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:ubtYSIVPFHA.4088@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> "Philipp" <Philipp_Guf***@yahoo.de> schrieb:
> >I know VB since 4 years and VB.net since 2 days and I think that the
change
> > from VB to VB.net harder than from C++ or Java to VB.net - this probably
> > the
> > oop - concept. Every programmer say, that VB.net is so nice and so
> > powerful,
> > but what are the disadvantages????, every language has disadvantages i
> > think.
>
> From a technical point of view VB.NET is a great programming language.
> There are very few technical reasons for choosing another programming
> language to develop applications for the .NET Framework.
>
> However, VB/VB.NET has one huge disadvantage:  Customers' investments made
> in the VB programming language were not preserved in the past when a new
> "version" of the language was released, at least not at the level it was
> done for other programming languages (VC++, VFP, ...).  Microsoft has
> decided to dispose VB6 and consequently disposed its customers' assets.
> There is no guarantee that this won't happen again in a few years.  If you
> are not writing throw-away tools, I suggest to use C++, because that is
what
> Microsoft uses and for that reason won't dispose.
>
> Just my 2 Euro cents...
>
> --
>  M S   Herfried K. Wagner
> M V P  <URL:http://dotnet.mvps.org/>
>  V B   <URL:http://classicvb.org/petition/>
>

"Herfried K. Wagner [MVP]" <hirf-spam-me-here@gmx.at> wrote in message
news:ubtYSIVPFHA.4088@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> "Philipp" <Philipp_Guf***@yahoo.de> schrieb:
>>I know VB since 4 years and VB.net since 2 days and I think that the
>>change
>> from VB to VB.net harder than from C++ or Java to VB.net - this probably
>> the
>> oop - concept. Every programmer say, that VB.net is so nice and so
>> powerful,
>> but what are the disadvantages????, every language has disadvantages i
>> think.
>
> From a technical point of view VB.NET is a great programming language.
> There are very few technical reasons for choosing another programming
> language to develop applications for the .NET Framework.
>
> However, VB/VB.NET has one huge disadvantage:  Customers' investments made
> in the VB programming language were not preserved in the past when a new
> "version" of the language was released, at least not at the level it was
> done for other programming languages (VC++, VFP, ...).  Microsoft has
> decided to dispose VB6 and consequently disposed its customers' assets.
> There is no guarantee that this won't happen again in a few years.  If you
> are not writing throw-away tools, I suggest to use C++, because that is
> what Microsoft uses and for that reason won't dispose.
>
> Just my 2 Euro cents...
>
> --
> M S   Herfried K. Wagner
> M V P  <URL:http://dotnet.mvps.org/>
> V B   <URL:http://classicvb.org/petition/>

>Bob,
>
>"Bob Powell [MVP]" <bob@_spamkiller_bobpowell.net> schrieb:
>>I think that in fairness to Microsoft and it's recent controversial
>>announcement, VB6 is an old dog that should have been put down years ago.
>>To maintain a language entrenched in 1960's programming ideas for so long
>>was not good for the VB community. This is evidenced by the fact that there
>>are so many VB programmers today who are still asking the fundamental
>>question "What is OOP?"
>
>I disagree.  VB6 should have been /extended/ to support OO without breaking
>existing code.  This would have been possible, Microsoft worked on such a
>VB7.  Over the time there were improvements of OO support in VB, and VB7 was
>expected to contain better/full OO support.  However, VB7 has never been
>released; instead, an incompatible VB.NET was marketed as VB6's successor,
>which technically is not true.
>
>I don't think that a platform or technology shift is a bad thing, I believe
>it's necessary from time to time.  Nevertheless, typically a programming
>language should /abstract/ from platforms and technologies and thus a change
>in platform or technology should not break existing code.  Microsoft chose
>to design a programming language from scratch instead of evolutionarily
>extending an existing programming language.
>
>> Object oriented programming was invented in 1968 and even C++ was 15 years
>> down the road from that milestone. The VB6 crowd have a lot of catching up
>> to do.
>
>Well, VB contains lots of things C++ doesn't provide, decent property
>support, for example.  Do you think this is a reason for "putting down C++"?
>Languages can evolve over time and missing features are added, but this must
>not be a revolutionary change.
>
>> Regarding your comment on using C++ I would say that the fact that ASP+ is
>> written largely in C# with a little C++ mixed in and that more and more
>> products at Microsoft use C# as the primary source code suggests that this
>> lanaguage and, by association, .NET won't go away.
>
>Did anybody think that COM will be "deprecated" and replaced by .NET some
>years ago?  It's utopistic to think that .NET won't have a, most likely
>incompatible, successor.

"Cor Ligthert" <notmyfirstn***@planet.nl> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:ObmNp5ZPFHA.3560@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Philipp,
>
> The same as from C to C++.
>
> The language elements are the same, the way of using it is different.
>
> Just my opinon.
>
> Cor
>
>