Slashdot Mirror
Making an Argument Against Using Visual-Basic?
ethan_clark asks: "I work for a small company (< 10 employees) as a software engineer. The company got its start with a software product written by the owner in VisualBasic. He hired me to assist in rewriting the software – only catch is, he's stuck on having it re-written in VisualBasic. This scares me, but I honestly can't make a good argument against VB because I'm not familiar enough with it.
So my question is twofold: I am looking for some confirmation to my suspicion that VB isn't the greatest language for large projects; and If VB isn't good, arguments against using it. If it is good, what arguments would you use to argue for it (for my sake)?" If you are going to argue against a language, it is best if you do so after you become familiar with it so that you can argue fairly on its merits and deficiencies. VisualBasic, like just about every other language, has its place. For the sake of discussion however, what tasks would VisualBasic not be suited for?
Forgive my overall ignorance--I'm a Mac and Linux and Java person, although I've written a bit of VB in a job years ago--but does anyone know if moving to VB.Net allows a phased-in approach to introducing at least some C# programming down the road?
.Net languages allow a decent functional "Mix 'n Match" capability? If so, I'd make sure the VB rewrite was in VB.Net (or are there VB.Net idiosyncrasies that would justify sticking with the old VB6?) and then I'd learn C# really well. At some point in the project some component might fall under the "this will really suck under VB, and we can tackle it much better by writing this piece in C#" which will let you get a toe-hold on the idea of using a better language.
Do the
That's the way I helped a Fortune 500 company start adopting Linux back in 1998... the friendly and subversive way!
As for the tasks VB are not suited for (again, I only know VB6, not VB.Net) the biggest glaring omission in my experience was the lack of decent Regular Expressions, or Hash Tables / "Dictionaries"--unless you link to the VBScript/IE6 library like everyone used to. On the other hand, there are IMOHO problems with languages like Perl that make them bad for a number of solutions, but that hasn't stopped nutty fanatics from treating them like "golden hammers".
While I'm writing disclaimers, there are a number of commercial applications out there written entirely in VB. In all cases I've observed, they "evolved" out of a simple and useful app and fell into being examples of the most counter-intuitive user interfaces and over all "kludginess".
Murray Todd Williams
VB = 6 is unadulterated crap. VB.NET isn't half bad, although I much prefer C#.
"...always new atoms but always doing the same dance, remembering what the dance was yesterday." -Richard Feynman
What kind of project are you working on? The only description you provided is "Large". That could mean 3D FPS, relational database, mission-critical embedded vision system for an interstellar satellite, a cross-platform OS... all very different projects, and probably not suitable for VB.
Picking the right tool really requires a better understanding of your project.
Beyond the general problem, what are your expectations for reliability/testability, schedule, maintainability, expandability, performance?
If the owner is the only one qualified to improve the product, Visual Basic might be a good choice.
I once worked for a company that had an extremely accurate satellite propagation program. The problem was it was written in GWBASIC and did not run in a text-only mode (EGA graphics required!). For fun, I tried to convert it to C, but gave up - pure spaghetti code. The author became the head of a 200-person engineering department -- best leave it in GWBASIC and let him support it.
HIV Crosses Species Barrier... into Muppets
VisualBasic, like just about every other language, has its place.
And it's called hell.
There's a different point of view you need to seriously consider: who's signing your paycheck? It's not Microsoft, is it? I thought not.
Consider meeting your boss in the middle. It's possible your boss is set on VB6 because he can read it fluently. Perhaps you could convince him to port it to VB.net. VB.net might not be so different that it would scare him. The GUI isn't all that different. And the .net framework would allow you to gradually expose him to other languages (C# or C++/CLI.) And it would allow you the opportunity to use a language with better libraries than VB6.
Have you dug a bit to find out why he's so pro-VB6? Maybe he's biased against .net because it's an interpreted language (like Java)? Perhaps half of his client base is all still running Windows 95 on 90 MHz pentiums, and .net is not an option for them. Maybe he'd be OK with C or C++ compiled to native executables, as long as there are no .net requirements. Microsoft's latest version of C/C++ has a strong push towards safer coding with bounds-checked versions of all the standard library functions. That might be good enough for him.
Or maybe he just has only two or three long-term clients that are stuck on Windows 3.1, but they've been with him for 25 years so he feels he has to support them into the far future. Consider buying them a few cheapo PCs to run your software: $400 each for a few bottom-feeder Dells would go a long way with customer goodwill, and would allow the rest of you to move into the 21st century of tools. And a $1200 hardware investment is much less money than your time spent struggling with old tools.
If he built a successful business around a piece of software, the chances are good he's smart enough to listen to rational arguments. So don't be irrational by kicking in your heels and saying "no! no! no!" unless you really enjoy job hunting.
John
Modern VB (VB.NET) is pretty full featured and un-crappy. It, like other .NET languages compiles down to MSIL so should behave identically to anything else. The only real arguement is based around that; if say... VB.NET and C# perform identically, why not use C#? It (arguably) has more of a following, (arguably) has a cleaner syntax, and (arguably) has a more java/C-like syntax incase you happen across people with that background. Not terribly compelling in the face of momentum...
You were hired to rewrite some VB software, but you're not familiar with VB? The problem isn't VB, it's you.
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
Joel Spolsky explained why CityDesk, written by a shop populated entirely by highly qualified C++ coders, is 95% VB. He has a frank discussion of VB's pros and cons as a development tool, and you may find that many points he discusses will resonate with you as you develop your reasoning. Even if you don't come to the same conclusion he does, it's an excellent discussion of just the topic you propose.
Really, reading his argument in the context of having a bunch of C++ coders build a nice Windows app in 2006, I think I'd probably conclude that C# was the way to go, as opposed to VB. But keep in mind that C#.NET and VB.NET are more alike than they are different. For most apps, the arguments for managed code (VB or other) are very potent.
My take: If you and every single developer on your team can't instantly see and explain the differences between the 4 arguments to this function:
void foo(std::string a, std::string * b, std::string & c, std::string *& d)
stop now and use managed code of some kind.
If you all can, think really hard about why you want to spend your talent managing memory instead of doing things that'll really make your application shine. (There are reasons. They don't apply to most apps.)
.sig: file not found
Visual Basic (especially VB6) have no place in the enterprise.
... End If" rather than "if (foo) {...}" has no place in my brain.
C# and VB.NET are very similar, and C# has a much more standardized syntax style. It will take little time to teach someone C# that is familiar with Java or even C++, but it could take some time to acclimate that same programmer to VB's retarded syntax style. Any language with constructs like "If Not foo Is Nothing Then
JavaScript, C, C++, C#, Java, and even Perl have the same curly-brace blocks, statements end with a semicolon syntax style.
If your boss gives you the often used "anyone can learn visual basic in a day" line, give him the "anyone can learn Java or C# in a day also, and the talent pool for those languages is much larger" response.
I would argue not using VB on the basis that it is not cross platform. Yes, Microsoft is not going anywhere, but there is some possibility that OS X or Linux could be big enough markets to consider. Especially if you are writing from scratch, why not consider a cross platform solution? It's a little more work, but it pays off in several ways. Larger audience, but more importantly different OSes catch different bugs. You wouldn't even have to target multiple platforms at the get go, but it would make porting it a hell of a lot easier down the road. However, it is VERY easy to write unportable code, especially with a compiled language, for example C++.
:) I say that partly in jest, they complement each other very well.
To that end: Python and C++ are generally good choices. They each have their place. I really like my C++, but rapid development is somewhat of a joke. It takes years and years to master and even after using it for close to 8 years on a daily basis I'm still amazed at what I don't know sometimes. However, you can do anything with C++. If you can think of something, there is already probably a library out there to do it. I don't recommend it to novices or people who want rapid development, however if you want a rock solid well performing system it really can't be beat.
If you're doing GUI stuff, you would have to take a VERY serious look at the combination of Python and Qt. Qt is the de facto cross platform toolkit. It has everything from GUI libraries to network libraries to regular expressions, xml parsers, you name it. It's very good. It's also very good with C++.
I don't know much about C#, but with Mono you at least have the possibility of it being cross platform. I'm not a big Java fan. After being a C++ guy for so many years it just seems like crap. It lacks the good things from C++ with all of the syntax overhead, and it lacks the flexibility of Python.
If you didn't guess I write almost everything it Python or C++. They are my dual golden hammers.
I do a lot of Scheme too, but I'd be an idiot to recommend that to you!
Perl is glorified shell. I wouldn't touch it except for the smallest most throw away programs, if even for that anymore. Still I know people who swear by it, mostly sysadmin types.
I've played with Ruby a bit. It has some definite strengths, but the library support, or lack thereof is a big minus. Syntactically it reeks of Perl and IMHO lacks the elegance of Python. Still it's got some really cool unique stuff.
Overall I would recommend Python, but like another post mentioned, what are you trying to accomplish? You should fit the tool to the task not the task to the tool.
I used to think so, too.
Try this.
Who's your buddy now? :-)
John
2. Geeks won't be impressed because it's so VB
3. Microsofties will explain how your language is "deprecated" unless it's VB.NET. Trust me, it's bad to be deprecated on.
4. Enterprise programmers will explain how C# (or Java) is better than VB.NET, has more constructs, etc.
5. (An elaboration of point #2.) To a programmer, "dim employees() as integer" just looks goofy.
6. You and your company will be a one-man profit center for Microsoft (their tools are priced so that they don't come cheap when you need to do real work). Here it's not so much big bad Microsoft that's a problem, but I hate being someone else's one-man profit center.
7. If it's Visual Basic 6, try to get a hold of Ted Pattison's (out of print) book on how to use Visual Basic with DCOM. It's a great book, but my takeaway was that it's easier and wiser just to say no. (I suspect this may have been Pattison's POV too).
First company I worked for produced a series of ActiveX controls written in VB, shipped and sold with the source. It supported 3 full time devs, 2 support/sales people, one HR person, and an intern (me).
.COM world and got absorbed by ZDNet, but their components are still for sale on Programmer's Paradise, last I checked.
:) ) without peer. As to the inavailability of new APIs: a) Pretty much anything in COM can be used -- although some trickery may be necessary for custom structures. b) Anything done in a "straight" Win32 API can be directly invoked -- akin to P/Invoke in the managed world. For database work, VB was unparalleled. The ease of data connections has now come in some degree to the managed code word, but in unmanaged code only VBA comes close. C++ just can't compete. VB is no longer entirely late-bound -- if a dual interface is available, and the code is written to expect that type rather than just Object, VB6 operates as an early bound client. VB6 is also capable of being used in a late-bound fashion with almost identical code to the early bound scenarios.
They vanished after they tried to compete in the
I got an internship with Microsoft after spending most of my interview defending VB as a language choice -- this was pre-C#/.Net.
Some "facts" from above annoyed me, so I'm responding:
1) VB is only interpreted.
VB6 can be compiled to P-code, and will run interpreted. However, by default it's compiled to executable code. The only "penalty" for using VB6 when it comes to speed is really the memory footprint of the VB6 runtime DLLs.
2) VB6 is not suited to large products.
I'm aware of at least one company that based an entire website off VB6 apps. I'm sure they would be ASP.Net now, but at the time (VB4), that wasn't yet an option. So the web engine was actually a series of VB apps that were invoked to process the web request as ReadLine and Print commands.
3) VB6 -> VB.Net
(The person in question did only propose this as an idea.)
I would argue against this. There are certain elements only possible in VB6, and the switch to managed code is unfortunately not as seamless as MS would have liked. Hence the uproar when MS EOL'd VB6. VB.Net is great for managed code, and even has some features that C# lacks. I personally prefer C#, but I come from enough of a mixed background that I can handle what VB.Net code comes my way. While rewriting the application in VB.Net may be the proper thing to do, it certainly does not provide much in the line of benefits above and beyond rewriting the application in C#.
VB does have certain benefits to use. As a RAD environment, it is (or was
While I can't know why your manager wants to use VB, it's not such a terrible order.
If your manager only wants to preserve the look-and-feel of previous versions, the previous proposal of writing COM components in C++ for the high-performance portions and using VB for the front-end is certainly a very viable option, and one that I've used previously. In this manner, the weaknesses of VB6 can be circumvented while still leveraging existing components and possibly even code. At the far end of the advancement spectrum, even managed components can be exposed to COM clients -- Adam Nathan's wonderful ".Net and COM: The Complete Interoperability Guide" is probably the most complete book on the subject. If appropriate, you can write new code in C#, and expose it back to VB6.
If your manager wants to preserve the code base in VB6, you might want to determine why he wants to rewrite the application -- it's possible a better solution is just to rewrite portions of the code, depending on the scope of the changes he desires. The right tool for the right job -- VB is the right tool for some jobs, but shouldn't be presupposed to be the right tool for every job.
That being said, there are few things you can't do in VB -- although some of the solutions are probably not as simple as they may be in other languages. Keep in mind, however, that it is even possible to get assembly code linked into a VB6 application, if necessary. It just takes a little bit of creativity.
I've done a great deal of VB programming over the years, and I've seen all manner of projects written in VB that never should have been. Now, the poster did not specify if they were talking about VB ala VB 6, or VB.NET - the two are completely different in so many respects an argument for/against one doesn't translate very well to the other.
.NET language lies in the .NET Framework, and the language chosen should be the one you are most syntactically comfortable with. That being said, I abhor the syntax of VB.NET; C# is more my cup of tea, but in the end they are (with minor exceptions) functionally equivalent. It takes about the same amount of work to do one thing in either.
.NET language can interoperate with libraries written in any other .NET language (assuming the library conforms to the CTS), but the same goes for VB applications; in VB, you're dealing strictly with COM, a technology designed to allow components written in disparate languages to interoperate.
.NET language.
Here's my two-cents, by language/environment:
VB6
---
If you're writing business applications, VB6 will get you through. Manipulating very large datasets can be a bit of a challenge, and you're always going to have problems with user experience (due in large part to a complete lack of multithreading). Applications can be made that are *functional*, although your resultant UI will always seem dated.
VB.NET
------
This is an entirely different beast. You've got a much more powerful langauge on your hands, with as much power and expressivity as Java - it is quite straightforward to produce a modern, performant application with little muss or fuss.
My suggestion, if VB is an absolute must, would be to insist (as best you can) on VB.NET. Now, that being said, VB is not a magic bullet - VB/VB.NET/C#/Java, they are all languages designed to allow a programmer to express their thoughts, and it's quite easy to produce unworkable software with any of them. Do not allow yourself to fall into the 'C# is better than VB.NET' arguments, simply because they are completely non-sensical; the power of any
I've worked professionally in VB, VB.NET, Java, Perl (alot of Perl, in fact), C#, and C/C++, and I must say IMO the most expressive langauge is C++, hands down. I love Perl, and you can do an amazing amount of things with it, but the power and flexibility of C++ is unmatched in the list above. VB.NET/C#, however, can be excellent choices for presentation-centric applications (Windows Forms applications or Web Forms). In the past, I've worked on projects that combined the two; a C# GUI that interfaced with a C++ server component. It worked great.
Any
Short Story: If you're writing a business-focused application with limited or no multithreading needs, VB works; If you need a modern GUI with all the latest bells and whistled VB.NET/C# should be examined; If you need high-performance, minimal runtime requirements, and low-level system interaction, look somewhere else. Real-time equipment monitoring, for instance, is a task best left to C++. The rest can be done in VB or a
Have fun!
Bryan
==
No, you pussy. Real Men(TM) use small magnets directly on platters. ;)
This original poster scares me. He wants arguments against VB, but doesn't explain the scope of his project, nor does he say what language he wishes to replace VB with. Most likely, he doesn't have much experience in the working world and would just prefer to use a language he's already used to from school.
The crucial ingredient in any project is the people you end up working with, not the language. I'm not a fan of VB, but if this kid doesn't have the experience of successfully completing a project in the real world, he should consider following the owner's experience -- and only worry about changing the underlying language once he has a couple of releases under his belt.
1. VB is not portable.
That's actually the main feature of Classic VB -- that it's really just a user-friendly wrapper around Windows COM. If you want MS Office automation or anything that ties in closely with other Windows apps, VB6 is still a very good choice.
Although I agree strongly with your assessment of VB server apps.
Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.
... and the bozos that like VB.
.Net isn't much more open), but that VB6 has been end-of-lifed. Obviously, it's not wise to make a significant investment in new development using an unsupported tool chain. Still ... at least it's no longer a moving target, and in spite of your rhetoric to the contrary there's still a large base of established VB coding talent. Much of it is migrating to .Net or Java, true, but there's a shitload of VB6 code out there and plenty of companies willing to shell out good money to maintain and develop with it. Purists such as yourself may not care for that, but there it is.
Not everyone needs to work on the bleeding edge, and not everyone that doesn't is an idiot.
In other words, you're a Java bigot that looks down upon those that don't agree with your choice of tools. It used to be C bigots that irritated me the most (the "if you can't do it in C it isn't worth doing" mindset), but now it seems that most of them have moved to C# and have finally realized the benefits of a decent GUI development system. A friend of mine once put it this way: "Welcome to VB you pompous assholes." VB6 and VB.Net have their place, and calling people that use them bozos won't win you any points (although you'll probably garner some karma from like-minded mods.) But the biggest argument to me isn't that VB6 is a black box (from an empirical standpoint it's about as thoroughly understood as it's possible for a black box to be, and
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Why do people keep dismissing C++?
Because it sucks .
It is a language designed so that a genius can write libraries designed for the merely smart to use. How many geniuses do you have in your workgroup? Me, I'm lucky. But I'd really rather they work on real design than trying to remember how copy constructors interact with template instantiation.
I don't know C++, and I know that I don't know it. Somewhere around here I have a list of interview questions for people who put C++ on their resume. They're mostly from me reading C++ code and going "what the heck does that imply?"
Unsurprisingly, most candidates fail that section of the interview. And they fail even trivial stuff like "what's a virtual pointer all about?" They may be aces at writing O(n^3) algorithms with CString, but they have no clue what's going on under the surface.
To be fair, I do know some true C++ experts. Most of them would rather be writing Haskell.
I remember back in 2000 my roomate had a job with a small firm that was kind of a "coders for hire" place. They didn't have a product, but if you came to them with something you wanted made they made it. Mostly a bunch of CS grads that didn't know anytihng but Java, however a few like my roomate were more diverse. He knew a few languages but PERL was his thing. Guy was a complete PERL badass wrote amazingly fast PERL code. PERL + MySQL development under Linux was his thing. Not at all a fan of MS development environments.
So General Motors, or at least some small division of it, hired their company to do a project and my roomate was assigned to it. He was kinda miffed though, because GM insisted it had to be done in VB. He talked to them and they acceded that the backend could be in PERL, but the client side UI had to be VB. Well he didn't really know anything about VB, he just disdained it as a "toy language"... That all changed on that project. He was amazed by it's flexability in doing Is and speed of development. He said that every time they totally changed the requirements of the client interface he could get a new one done in a couple hours.
In the end, he was certianly no VB-all-the-time convert, but he had a respect for the situations it was useful in.
Not knowing anyting about this project I can't say, but there are projects out there that something like VB is the best answer for.
Because C++ sucks when you put it in the hands of the VB crowd. It not only gives you enough rope to hang yourself with, it then proceeds to give you another mile. The language allows programming in about twenty different paradigms, the base support of which are usually per-project custom-implemented (own framework) or crappy (MFC), and because of this and the lack of a large standard library (I mean, one that the VB crowd can grasp), abilities that you gained on one C++ project do _not_ transfer well to other C++ projects.
Now don't get me wrong, I work with C++ every day and I love it because of the sheer power it gives me. You can basically abstract away any management chores using smart pointers and other objects. And you can write the most obscenely decoupled functionality using traits classes and such. But put this same stuff in the hands of a VB coder, and you'll get C++ code using VB idiom. And that's NOT GOOD. VB coding idiom is not exception safe AND does not deal with memory management, so you'll have memory leaks all over the place, and even if they bother to put in the deletes in the proper places, you're one exception away from leaking a whole bunch of stuff. Teach them to use smart pointers to fix this? In an average C++ project "done right", you'll have to write a lot of smart pointers/auto objects yourself, and people who are used to VB are _not_ capable of writing proper smart pointers in C++. That requires reading and understanding all of Scott Meyers' books, and they won't do that. They'll think they grasp the language when they have their first MFC-generated dialog on-screen. It'll only get worse from there.
Isn't this one of those bad ideas? Joel Spolsky seems to think so, and while he isn't an oracle, his opinion is worth something.
Suggest not rewriting the software and simply going through and improving where needed.
1) VB doesn't work well with source code control - it has unnecessary binary files (*.frx, *.ctx) and it's text files create bad diffs because the IDE flips lines around and changes case of identifiers
2) COM components in VB don't keep the same GUID from time to time (depending on what changes you're making). This causes build problems because when the component's GUIDs change, you have to change all the other projects that reference them. This can be a huge timesink in development.
3) VB6 is unsupported and is a black box, which means no one else can support it either
stay frosty and alert
> This scares me, but I honestly can't make a good argument
;-)
.Net at moment has only two versions - 1.x and 2.0 - and all components of next "XXX-Hell" are there: M$ doesn't do excplicit versioning of libraries nor APIs.
> against VB because I'm not familiar enough with it.
I, as system programmer, for three years did ported number of VB applications to C/C++. Funny job for system programmer, don't you think?
The list of problems of my employer was:
1. Run-time libraries conflicts. VB applications affected worse of all by "DLL-Hell" probles of Windows: lots of functionality resides in ActiveX components developped by third parties. People usually quote ActiveX support as VB first advantage, but from POV of deployment and support it is hell.
2. Run-time libraries dependencies. Since VB is all into ActiveX, you might start using some component you haven't explicitely installed. Then when you ship the application to your customers you might find yourself in silly situation: half of them report everything is Ok, half - scream that nothing is working. Apparently, first half have the similar set of applications installed - and VB application finds the library missing from its own installation.
3. Internationalization. That was huge problem for my employer. We have had quite number of customers in Japan. M$ did internationalizion of VB in straight way: it didn't. In other words, VB as we have it in Europe/US and VB in Asia are two different VBs. Absolutely different. Since Japanese love VB, most of our customers had it installed. The situation looked so: if customer installs our application - other and her/his own applications stop working; if s/he reinstalls VB anew - our application stop working. Interpreter is the same, but run time libraries are very very different.
4. Upgradability. VB applications are one hell to maintain. We have had lots of reports that installation of our application made with VB4 was breaking VB5/VB6 installations. According to M$, the cure was to upgrade everyone to VB6. But VB6 introduced some problems so our custormers were split - half used VB5 and other half VB6.
To conclude. One can write good application in VB. But M$ doesn't make that very easy. The whole ActiveX thing is one hell to deploy and maintain.
All hope abandon ye who enter here.
I've written/maintained large programs (.5 megalines) in Java. At some time I had to write a simple program in VB.NET 1.1 (with about 10, 15 k lines). The things I noticed:
..., keep yourself busy-coding)
-to me, the syntax is OK
-the API, compared to Java, is really bad (no jdbc, no generics,
-the GUI is easy
-writing maintainable code is difficult. VB(.NET) is hard to style because of its IDE. Eclipse is magnitudes better.
Good Points about VB:
Bad Points of VB
Overall Thoughts
I have been programming in VB since Version 2, and right up to Version 6. I cut my teeth on programming Windows Applications using VB, and I have to admit it is one of my favorite development systems. I also program in C++. I use VB to prototype an application, the other guys and customers can comment of the look and feel of the software, and modifications are easy to make. Once everyone is happy with the App, it is then ported to C++.
VB.NET is not VB (google for Visual Fred) VB.Net is a completely different language to VB and it is not code compatible. Time will have to be taken to rewrite the parts of a VB app that don't work under VB.Net
VB is a fine system and well suited to RAD projects, DB projects, and client/server projects. However, if you are looking for a system that creates faster code, is more secure, and easier to maintain, then you'll need to start working with things like C/C++/Java/etc
First, VB.NET is everybit the language that C# and/or Java are (that is there is NOTHING that can be done in those languages that can not be done in VB.NET (Regular Expressions, Hashtables etc. and much more is available to programmers in VB.NET)
Second, if the original application was done in VB (6 or earlier) then there is no reason to believe that the language is no longer suited to the task, the only real question is "is the programmer up to the task?" Since VB and C# compile to MSIL (if both the VB code and the C# Code are "well written" then they will compile to the SAME MSIL (or near enough as to not matter...) the ONLY argument for one over the other is comfort/skill level of the programmer. This is not a trivial matter. I am far more productive in VB.NET because that is where I am comfortable, not because it is a better or worse language I can read/write VB much as I can [in my native language of] english. Where as I can read/write C# or Java about like my French, in which I am reasonably fluent, but I have to concentrate more on the translation. And thus we reach the ONLY real argument for you to make against VB, will you be more productive (and therefore cost your employer less) if you work in another language? If you believe this to be so, then you should already be able to quantify this.
Admittedly, There are far more "less skilled" programmers in the VB world than there are in the C#/Java realm. This is simply because people can learn to do "useful things" in VB (or VB.NET) far more easily than they can in C-based languages. The "entry threshold" to "being a VB 'programmer'" is lower. Still the high end abilities of the language are there, even if a number of programmers don't know how to use them, or use them correctly.
Anybody out there proclaiming that any language (other than C or assembler) is "better" then VB.NET is simply demonstrating their own ignorance of VB.
That's actually some sort of bytecode. I've been hacking x86 assembly for 10 years now, and there's no way x86 has a "ldxb" instruction.
Error: password can't contain reverse spelling of ancient Chinese emperor
I have one customer that specs VB.NET for all their apps. After getting comfortable with it there's just no reason for some of the comments here. VB isn't "easier" than C#, just different. If you're a bad VB programmer, switching to C# isn't going to make you a better one.
My opinion is that a lot of bias against VB stretches back to the day when it was not considered a "real" programming language. But it's grown up and turned into a capable language and if that's what the customer wants, there's no need to try to sell them on C#.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
He hired you to rewrite this thing in VB, even though you aren't familiar enough with VB to effectively argue (one way or the other) its merits? So he's smart enough to have written the software that got the company started, but he's not smart enough to realize he should hire somebody who *knows* the language he wants them to work in? Does he seriously think it's a good idea to have somebody who's new to the language writing production code in that language?
I don't.
If you're going to be working on rewriting it, it needs to be rewritten in a language you have significant experience writing in. Period. For instance, if *I* were going to be rewriting it, the logical languages to choose would be Perl or maybe lisp, because those are the languages I know well enough to write good code. If he wanted it rewritten in VB, he needed to hire someone with VB experience.
VB *is* reasonably good for certain things (mostly, pure GUI work, e.g., an application that facilitates data entry), but only if the programmer doing the work is familiar with VB. I've seen applications written in VB by someone who didn't know the language well, and they were universally terrible in every respect (_including_ the UI). This is true in any language. When somebody is just learning the language, they aren't going to be comfortable with the language's features or conventions, and so they're going to write execrable code for several months until they learn those things. During that time, you don't want them writing something mission-critical in that language. It's bad juju.
Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
You were hired to rewrite some VB software, but you're not familiar with VB? The problem isn't VB, it's you.
Actually, the problem is whoever hires people who are qualified for task A to do task B.
This is a perfect example of the difference between a university-educated computer scientist, and a graduate of a 6-month "tech college" program. The community college drone has only been taught how to use one or two tools to perform common tasks, whereas the computer scientist is taught to truly understand the tools, as well as the thinking that went into them, how to use them to solve multiple abstract classes of problems (instead of just a few common, specific problems), and how to apply that knowledge to use tools they haven't seen yet.
A real computer scientist doesn't care what language they work in. A good employer should know that when they hire the 6-month grad at $18/hr, they're getting a code monkey that can do only what is explictly listed on their resume. They know that when they spend the extra money for a computer scientist with an actual degree, they expect that programmer to be much more capable, flexible, and adaptable. The fact that they've never programmed in VB before is nothing more than a minor roadblock. Send them to Borders/Indigo/Chapters with $50, tell them to pick up an O'Reilly or Knox book on VB, leave them alone for a couple days, and they should then be able to apply all their learning in the new language.
Like woodworking? Build your own picture frames.
>He hired me to assist in rewriting the software - only catch is, he's stuck on having it re-written
>in VisualBasic. This scares me, but I honestly can't make a good argument against VB because I'm
>not familiar enough with it.
So if you were hired to do this job, wasn't it made plain up front that it was to be done in VB? If this scares you now, didn't it scare you then? Why did you take the job? If you're not very familiar with VB, why would someone hire you to re-write a program using VB?
Steve
A work that expires before its copyright never enters the public domain and thus enjoys eternal copyright protection.
Or, to be more accurate:
VB, as a language, is the worst language I have used in the last 20 years.
VB as a development platform is the most productive system I have used in the last 20 years.
Hate the language, love the system. You will too.
Change that last sentence to...
"Every language does have it's place, but there are perceptions tha can raise and lower a language's value ON YOUR RESUME"
The perception itself does not raise or lower the actual value
Story:
Way back when, in the DARK days of DOS programming, and when most if not all of Microsoft's support was done on CompuServe, one of the forums was called "MSLANGS" - In there, among others, were the C form, and the PDS form (read that as Pro Compiled BASIC). Both generated OBJ files, for the identical linker (MASM used the same linker) - and in fact, if you wrote code that did NOT involve stings, and used the equivilent control structures, you got identical OBJ files. The big differences were pointers in C, and BSTRS in Basic. Now, as a LOT of business code then, as now, was string related, the string functions that were in basic allowed you to develop certain classes of application a LOT faster than the C guys. They would slag on us for "BASIC", and we'd smile, underbid them, and produce the work in less time. Yeah, the perceved value for a "BASIC" programmer was lower - but often the client didn't care what it was written in - only what the application did, how it performed, and how it was going to be maintained. So, which tool was more valuable? If I can underbid you by 10%, but do the job in 25% less time.... (hence, get more contracts...)
Languages are tools - pick the tool for the job.
Of course, sometimes part of the "Job" is your OWN personal development - then perceptions count for a lot
Back then, it was HARD for a BASIC programmer to get a job - VERY hard. It was niche - BIG time (IEEE-488 aka GPIB aka HPIB instrament control was one - the one I was in). Even if you had a CS degree, folks looked down at you. Then one day, Microsoft came out with VB 1.0. I ordered my copy that day. The world changed. Withing a year, the folks who KNEW BASIC (the old DOS stuff) were in demand, as we actually had a clue. I've never looked back. I've done some C, some light C++, enough MASM to have shipped a bunch of old DOS drivers to clients, and now C# and others.
My advise to anyone reading? Don't be a lanuage snob, but also, don't forget, there are language snobs out there, perceptions DO matter, and don't let yourself get boxed into a corner. Evolve or die
-- 73 de KG2V For the Children - RKBA! "You are what you do when it counts" - the Masso