Comments on: The VB OSS debarkle

By: Peter Bromberg

Peter Bromberg — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 21:44:23 +0000

VB.NET really is a different language. I used it classic VB for years until .NET Framework and then bit off on the C# learning curve, which I’ll never regret. VB has so much ancient baggage — even as far back as the old “BASIC” and has been so painfully retrofiitted to accomodate the .NET Framework that it has become a mess. It’s really up to the VB.NET team at Microsoft to bring VB.NET into parity with C#.

By: J.P. Hamilton

J.P. Hamilton — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 22:51:22 +0000

Is there really such a thing as a VB programmer any more? Everyone I know that is doing VB (me included unfortunately) is being forced to by their clients.

By: Steve

Steve — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 12:40:18 +0000

Its open source, if certain items aren’t working in VB, then a contributor can make updates for other VBers

C# is a great language, it was touted as the .NET language of choice from day 1. Let’s not beat the bushes, VB.NET was a stepping stone to move VB developers to C#. Those still hanging on to VB.NET are hurting their careers.

By: Derik Whittaker

Derik Whittaker — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 11:20:28 +0000

Well put, i like how you stated they are different languages and how u compared them to ruby.

I agree, when building a framework you should utilize the features of the language. However, i think roys point was that if you want to make a framework in .net you should at least consider the fact that not all languages within .net can support the same syntax. With this being the case maybe you should ‘fork’ the framework and create 2 interfaces.

I am not saying i agree with that statement, but i can see his side of the story.

By: James Gregory

James Gregory — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 10:51:39 +0000

I stand corrected!

By: Paul Batum

Paul Batum — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 10:45:05 +0000

Hah! You know ME, and I think that C# is really awesome! It is, after all, my blub.