Visual Basic.NET

[lovehuman]

For those who want to have a first look at Visual Basic.NET

Follow the link:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/01/02/vbnet/vbnet.asp

 

[jmarler]

Just read it . . . Great article! For those of you who would like to acutally TRY vb.net (still VERY Beta), check out this linkg. You can D/L or order a CD with VB.Net!

http://msdn.microsoft.com/downloads...=/msdn-files/027/000/976/msdncompositedoc.xml

- Jeff Marler B-)

 

[rtshort]

Who has tried VB.Net and how does it compare to VB 6.0?
Every day above ground is a GOOD DAY!!!

 

[Karl Blessing]

I have seen that it was very good, lots of nice new features, but what I dont understand (unrelated to vB exactly) is that they say VB.Net is going to replace, Interdev, I Cannot see how this is possible, because it still alows one heck of alot of parts needed to replace Interdev. Karl Blessing aka kb244{fastHACK}

 

[RickSpr]

While the language will look very similar, comparing VB.Net and VB6 is a frustrating exercise. It will be very difficult to port code from 6 to .Net. Some of the problems are:
-- Set statement is obsolete, replaced by ordinary assignment (implicit Let) statement. However, to make that possible,
-- Default properties are gone. All properties must be named explicitly.
-- Error handling is improved by implementation of structured error handling, similar to C++ or Delphi Try...Except...Finally statements. I'm not sure if the old style is grandfathered in.

There are many positive new features, however, including true (implementation) inheritance, and I look forward to VB.Net development. I expect it will take a little bit different mindset though, almost like programming in a different language. Rick Sprague

 

[rtshort]

I have read somewhere that they were going to put some of the statements like "set" back into VB.Net because a lot of VB6.0 programmers didn't like the fact that all of it was gone and it would be like learning it all over again. Has anyone else read or heard anything like this. I can't remember what website I read it on though. It was a review. Every day above ground is a GOOD DAY!!!

 

[Karl Blessing]

so in otherwords, you basically said that normal VBer, are going to have to enforce coding disipline , like you normally would when yo move from VB to say C++. Karl Blessing aka kb244{fastHACK}

 

[RickSpr]

Karl,

Yes, from what I have read, VB.Net will require more discipline. Although what rtshort says is true--Microsoft is backing down, for the time being, on some of the more stringent requirements. I didn't think Set was one of them, though I could be wrong. Rick Sprague

 

[Karl Blessing]

Well personally I think set is important, and will probally be kept, mainly for this reason (both VB and ASP related)

saying
this = that will not always work

for example
you cant say

RS = Server.CreateObject("ADODB.Recordset&quot (or without the "Server. for VB&quot

basically without the set, it makes it rather hard to set a variable as a reference of an object , rather than the value of the object.

now if it is true they are taking away set,I assume they are going to go for a more C++-like approach, or OOP in a way

of saying
(this is somewhat c++ in the way I am making the example)

*TheVariable = AddrOf(TheObject)

or something pointer-like. Which would be something new they talked about for the new VB. Karl Blessing aka kb244{fastHACK}

 

[RickSpr]

Karl,

The reason you cited is exactly why default properties went away too. Consider:
Dim v As Variant
v = cboSelect
Without Set, that was ambiguous. Was v set to the combo box object, or to the combo's Value property (its default property)? Eliminating default properties disambiguates the expression. Rick Sprague

 

[Karl Blessing]

thus, forces you to become more disciplined and aware of specifically what you want. Karl Blessing aka kb244{fastHACK}

 

[RickSpr]

Yeah, and I actually like that. For one thing, it avoids a lot of bugs that can get into production. For another, it steepens the learning curve, raising barriers to entry and increasing the level of professionalism required to become a VB developer. That benefits those of us who have to pick up somebody else's code, and enhances our prestige and (not coincidentally) our potential earnings. So I'd just as soon see VB fork into VB for technical users and VB for professionals, myself. I'd rather Microsoft didn't back down from their original .Net plans. Rick Sprague

 

[rtshort]

I haven't been at this but about 4 months or so. I guess if it's going to make a major change, it's just as well to be now while I'm begining to learn instead of having to learn it all again later. Just wish they would make their minds up. Forking into two different versions as RickSpr suggests may not me a bad idea. Every day above ground is a GOOD DAY!!!

 

[JJR]

For those interested, my departement is one of the early adapters of .Net and we're developing a showcase (with Beta 2), that's going to be included in the .Net MSDN. Just browse to

http://www.jaggle.com

or

http://www.jaggle.net

to view the source code, browse the documentation, etc.

Jordi Reineman

 

[MatsHulten]

For all of you intrested in discussing VB.Net, I thought you should know there is a brand new forum just for this!

(Just in case you didn't know yet.)


-Mats Hulten