Is VB.NET dead? - DOTNET

Hi!

I think you should write to Bill Gates. He is in the 5% as MS that will
understand you

Wolfgang

PS: i feel with you
"herbert" <herbert@discussions.microsoft.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:1143496A-CD81-4E3A-8932-E5291DB184D3@microsoft.com...
> Dear VB.NET Team,
>
> you did a wonderful job in making VB.NET a full fledged language, at least
> on the compiler side. When teaching students I always see that solving
> labs
> using VB.NET gives a faster result than C#.
>
> However the "distribution chain" to your customers is totally wrecked:
> I bought five WCF books in the last months, none of them contains VB.NET
> samples. Nor does any of the source code websites I visited lately.
> (M.L. Bustamente just shipped a subset of samples in VB.NET, yet her book
> does not use it).
>
> The Problem:
> VB.NET programmers spend/waste considerable time translating code snippets
> and samples by figuring out how to translate nitty gritty C# features
> which
> are not available in VB.NET into working code.
> I even have a book by Chris Sells (Programming Windows Forms 2.0) who
> wrote
> me that one of his sample cannot be converted to VB.NET without redesign.
>
> I understand that you have no influence over the publishers like o'Reilly
> or
> Wrox. However
>
> 1) you have full access to the publication pipeline of MS-Press (yes: the
> WCF books of MS-Press just ignore VB.NET!) So why does MS-Press ignore
> VB.NET
> ?
>
> 2) All the books are written by authors who are more or less in close
> proximity to Microsoft: Juwal Löwy, M.L. Bustamente all make their money
> consulting MSFT technologies. So please talk to them!
>
> So for all book writers, speakers at conferences etc:
> give them a paper what to avoid in C# in order to make reading for VB.NET
> guys easier.
>
> (and keep on rewriting the VB.NET online help samples so that they don't
> look like auto-converted C#: there is a For...Each in VB.NET!)
>
> thank you very much
> no code no glory!
> herbert

This month's Redmond Developer magazine states VB.NET will continue to be
developed.but C# is the preferred language for general programming. Quite
frankly, I think many developers adopted C# as they quickly came to
understand web development requires a mastery of Javascript and the syntax
for Javascript and C# is exactly the same as it is with Java so a developer
learns three languages for the price of one.


<%= Clinton Gallagher
NET csgallagher AT metromilwaukee.com
URL http://clintongallagher.metromilwaukee.com/





"herbert" <herbert@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:1143496A-CD81-4E3A-8932-E5291DB184D3@microsoft.com...
> Dear VB.NET Team,
>
> you did a wonderful job in making VB.NET a full fledged language, at least
> on the compiler side. When teaching students I always see that solving
> labs
> using VB.NET gives a faster result than C#.
>
> However the "distribution chain" to your customers is totally wrecked:
> I bought five WCF books in the last months, none of them contains VB.NET
> samples. Nor does any of the source code websites I visited lately.
> (M.L. Bustamente just shipped a subset of samples in VB.NET, yet her book
> does not use it).
>
> The Problem:
> VB.NET programmers spend/waste considerable time translating code snippets
> and samples by figuring out how to translate nitty gritty C# features
> which
> are not available in VB.NET into working code.
> I even have a book by Chris Sells (Programming Windows Forms 2.0) who
> wrote
> me that one of his sample cannot be converted to VB.NET without redesign.
>
> I understand that you have no influence over the publishers like o'Reilly
> or
> Wrox. However
>
> 1) you have full access to the publication pipeline of MS-Press (yes: the
> WCF books of MS-Press just ignore VB.NET!) So why does MS-Press ignore
> VB.NET
> ?
>
> 2) All the books are written by authors who are more or less in close
> proximity to Microsoft: Juwal Löwy, M.L. Bustamente all make their money
> consulting MSFT technologies. So please talk to them!
>
> So for all book writers, speakers at conferences etc:
> give them a paper what to avoid in C# in order to make reading for VB.NET
> guys easier.
>
> (and keep on rewriting the VB.NET online help samples so that they don't
> look like auto-converted C#: there is a For...Each in VB.NET!)
>
> thank you very much
> no code no glory!
> herbert

clintonG <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
> This month's Redmond Developer magazine states VB.NET will continue to be
> developed.but C# is the preferred language for general programming. Quite
> frankly, I think many developers adopted C# as they quickly came to
> understand web development requires a mastery of Javascript and the syntax
> for Javascript and C# is exactly the same as it is with Java so a developer
> learns three languages for the price of one.

You keep repeating this, but ignore the fact there are very significant
differences between Java, JavaScript and C#. Please stop claiming that
the syntax is "exactly the same". They're all "curly braces" languages,
and there are some other similarities, but there are significant
differences too - and C# 3 will increase those differences further.

--
Jon Skeet - <skeet@pobox.com>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too

I keep repeating it because its true. You're confusing syntax with grammar
eh? There are other exactitudes such as case requirements all three
languages share. Maybe other features. The point to take home is the legacy
C languages require more discipline to learn and use which only serve to
improve a person's mastery of programming. That point is not missed by
employers and saavy customers which can be surmised to be another reason why
the trend has tipped towards C# development for those using the .NET
Framework.

In any event, Microsoft has made it perfectly clear continued development
for VB will be for weenies so to speak, those who will get all the shortcuts
and other time saving features which really isn't such a bad thing but
still, that's the message as I read it. In fact they say they are even
dropping the .NET nomenclature from VB.NET and intend to refer to it as VB
once again. Again, from my point of view its pacification for weenies who
don't want to study and work hard or risk the big taboo: change!

So why resent and blame me for seeing things the way they are? I certainly
don't feel superior so that should be said but I do feel better about myself
for having finally motivated myself to change by crossing the chasm and
adopting C#. As confused as you may be about the difference between syntax
and grammar I can now read and understand Java and have also become much
more adept at using Javascript as a result and when all is said about my
past experience with VB syntax and grammar I have not one bit or byte of
regret.

<%= Clinton

"Jon Skeet [C# MVP]" <skeet@pobox.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.212ad726990dea0839a@msnews.microsoft.com...
> clintonG <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
>> This month's Redmond Developer magazine states VB.NET will continue to be
>> developed.but C# is the preferred language for general programming. Quite
>> frankly, I think many developers adopted C# as they quickly came to
>> understand web development requires a mastery of Javascript and the
>> syntax
>> for Javascript and C# is exactly the same as it is with Java so a
>> developer
>> learns three languages for the price of one.
>
> You keep repeating this, but ignore the fact there are very significant
> differences between Java, JavaScript and C#. Please stop claiming that
> the syntax is "exactly the same". They're all "curly braces" languages,
> and there are some other similarities, but there are significant
> differences too - and C# 3 will increase those differences further.
>
> --
> Jon Skeet - <skeet@pobox.com>
> http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
> If replying to the group, please do not mail me too

clintonG <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
> I keep repeating it because its true. You're confusing syntax with grammar
> eh?

Maybe you should enlighten me then. The C# spec talks about "syntactic
grammar" being what specifies how tokens are combined to form C#
programs. What exactly do you count as syntax? Just the fact that it
uses curly braces?

Now, what's the syntax for deriving one class from another in Java, and
what's the syntax for that in C#?

What's the syntax for implementing an iterator block in Java?

What's the syntax for an extension method in Java?

What's the syntax for a covariant generic type parameter in C#?

What's the syntax for a lambda expression in Java?

What's the syntax for an anonymous inner class in C#?

Do I have to go on?

> So why resent and blame me for seeing things the way they are?

I'm blaming you for repeating a fallacy. I didn't say anything about C#
not being a good language to learn, similar in many ways to Java and
Javascript etc. I merely contradicted your claim that the syntax is
"exactly the same". It's not.

--
Jon Skeet - <skeet@pobox.com>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too

Forgetting about semantics...

The most significant thing in most programming is the framework. In
browser-based javascript, then the hard work is learning about the
browser DOM (in the various implementations), and the elements / css
etc.

C# and java have another 2 (very different) frameworks. Yes, you can
generally get the same things done, but the way you do it is very
different - as are the learning points.

Ditto C / C++

Ditto again ActiveScript (or whatever the ECMA-script in flash is
called).

Yes, the code may look very similar, but that is *entirely different*
to saying that the dev has learn't 3 languages[*]. For my money, other
than learning some basic syntax, it matters very little what the
actual coding language is. The framework is key.

*: I've used the term language here not in terms of pure "brace coment
tab begin end" etc terms, but in terms of actually being able to do
something, which really means learning the basics of the framework.

Marc

clintonG wrote:
> This month's Redmond Developer magazine states VB.NET will continue to be
> developed.but C# is the preferred language for general programming. Quite
> frankly, I think many developers adopted C# as they quickly came to
> understand web development requires a mastery of Javascript and the syntax
> for Javascript and C# is exactly the same as it is with Java so a developer
> learns three languages for the price of one.
>
>
Would it be possible to get a link to this article? I cant seem to find it.

clintonG wrote:

> I keep repeating it because its true. You're confusing syntax with
> grammar eh? There are other exactitudes such as case requirements all
> three languages share. Maybe other features. The point to take home
> is the legacy C languages require more discipline to learn and use
> which only serve to improve a person's mastery of programming. That
> point is not missed by employers and saavy customers which can be
> surmised to be another reason why the trend has tipped towards C#
> development for those using the .NET Framework.

What a load of BS. According to your ****ogy, people using C++ who can
really understand the STL code are the best programmers there are,
right?

Programming isn't about the language you're using. If you're still at
that level, you aren't in the group you described.

Hint: programming is done by using a tool, i.e. the language. Which
language? well, the one which has the best expressional power to
formulate the program in. Is C such a language? In a lot of cases: no.
Is C# such a language? Same answer. Is VB.NET? Same answer. There are
general purpose languages, all-round languages: you can write any
program with them with an expressional power which is sometimes great
and sometimes seriously crap.

> In any event, Microsoft has made it perfectly clear continued
> development for VB will be for weenies so to speak, those who will
> get all the shortcuts and other time saving features which really
> isn't such a bad thing but still, that's the message as I read it. In
> fact they say they are even dropping the .NET nomenclature from
> VB.NET and intend to refer to it as VB once again. Again, from my
> point of view its pacification for weenies who don't want to study
> and work hard or risk the big taboo: change!

Well, personally I don't like VB.NET's syntaxis because I don't like
languages which are deliberately ambiguous. That said, one of the core
members of VB.NET's team nowadays is Erik Meijer. I don't think Erik
needs any further introduction.

For weenies? no, I don't think it's for weenies. What are weenies btw?
People who think they're holier than thou because they use a certain
language? hahaha . Come on Clinton, you can do better than that .

VB.NET now finally takes a different direction than C#. I think that's
great. The thing is: as long as VB.NET is forced to act like it has the
same 'general purpose' sweet-spot as C# has, it will never be a
language which appeals to a lot of people. Simply because it has a
different sweet spot where it excells than C# has. By taking it into a
direction where this is more exposed, the language can be used where it
is more suitable and also it makes C# look like a language which is
more suitable in other scenario's which is also good, because as I
said: language is a tool, don't use a language X if the expressional
power for the particular problem you want to program for is horrible in
X but great in Y: you then should have used Y.

> So why resent and blame me for seeing things the way they are? I
> certainly don't feel superior so that should be said but I do feel
> better about myself for having finally motivated myself to change by
> crossing the chasm and adopting C#.

Why do you feel better? It's just a language, Clinton . What's key
is that you can formulate the solution to a problem in algorithms and
can translate these algorithms into executable form by using a
language. Picking a general purpose language like C# will do, but it's
often not the best choice for a particular problem simply because it's
not designed for that particular problem. For example SQL is excellent
for set-oriented operations but it sucks in imperative code. C# is the
opposite.

> As confused as you may be about
> the difference between syntax and grammar I can now read and
> understand Java and have also become much more adept at using
> Javascript as a result and when all is said about my past experience
> with VB syntax and grammar I have not one bit or byte of regret.

You can perhaps think whats written in Java is what you think it is,
but that doesn't make you a person who can write java code, simply
because it takes way more to write a proper program than some EBNF
chart.

Have you looked at ruby yet? I heared it's da bomb

FB

>
> <%= Clinton
>
> "Jon Skeet [C# MVP]" <skeet@pobox.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.212ad726990dea0839a@msnews.microsoft.com... >clintonG
> <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
> > > This month's Redmond Developer magazine states VB.NET will
> > > continue to be developed.but C# is the preferred language for
> > > general programming. Quite frankly, I think many developers
> > > adopted C# as they quickly came to understand web development
> > > requires a mastery of Javascript and the syntax for Javascript
> > > and C# is exactly the same as it is with Java so a developer
> > > learns three languages for the price of one.
> >
> > You keep repeating this, but ignore the fact there are very
> > significant differences between Java, JavaScript and C#. Please
> > stop claiming that the syntax is "exactly the same". They're all
> > "curly braces" languages, and there are some other similarities,
> > but there are significant differences too - and C# 3 will increase
> > those differences further.
> >
> > -- Jon Skeet - <skeet@pobox.com>
> > http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
> > If replying to the group, please do not mail me too



--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lead developer of LLBLGen Pro, the productive O/R mapper for .NET
LLBLGen Pro website: http://www.llblgen.com
My .NET blog: http://weblogs.asp.net/fbouma
Microsoft MVP (C#)
------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://reddevnews.com/columns/articl...torialsid=1862

You probably need to read it in context.



"Mick Walker" <materialised@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:5id722F3ob071U1@mid.individual.net...
> clintonG wrote:
>> This month's Redmond Developer magazine states VB.NET will continue to be
>> developed.but C# is the preferred language for general programming. Quite
>> frankly, I think many developers adopted C# as they quickly came to
>> understand web development requires a mastery of Javascript and the
>> syntax for Javascript and C# is exactly the same as it is with Java so a
>> developer learns three languages for the price of one.
>>
> Would it be possible to get a link to this article? I cant seem to find
> it.