Do I need to know Visual Basic inorder to learn VB.Net ?

[Ravichandran J.V.]

No, they are two entirely different languages for two different
runtimes. They are remarkably similar in syntax but that's where the
similarity ends; the differences are evident only at runtim !!

with regards,


J.V.Ravichandran
- http://www.geocities.com/
jvravichandran
- http://www.411asp.net/func/search?
qry=Ravichandran+J.V.&cob=aspnetpro
- http://www.southasianoutlook.com
- http://www.MSDNAA.Net
- http://www.csharphelp.com
- http://www.poetry.com/Publications/
display.asp?ID=P3966388&BN=999&PN=2
- Or, just search on "J.V.Ravichandran"
at http://www.Google.com

 

[Herfried K. Wagner [MVP]]

Tom,

VB.NET is no more OOP then Java. They implement almost the exact same
features when it comes to the 3 pillars.

Look, I'm not saying that Java is better - I'm just saying that it isn't
"less OO" then VB.NET. Given the choice between Java and anything .NET,
I'd take .NET everytime (and this has been recently made clear to me
having been sort of helping a little with a Java webservices client)

Java is more restricted to OO-only features, VB.NET isn't.

BTW: VB.NET /is/ more OO, because we have late binding which doesn't
exist in Java ('Option Strict Off').

 

[Herfried K. Wagner [MVP]]

Cor,

Java is already a time back in my memory and I have only learned it. I do
not know the new improvements from Java (although improved C in my opinion)
and because of that: "did you see me write Java somewhere?

There are/were a lot of improvements in Java2. For example, in Version
1.5, generics will be introduced. The .NET CLR 2.0 will have generics
too. Nevertheless, some things still remain bad (for example, the
'import' statement
<URL:http://www.jelovic.com/articles/java_namespaces_suck_big_time.htm>).

 

[Tom Shelton]

Tom,



Java is more restricted to OO-only features, VB.NET isn't.

That's true. So, Java is more OO.

BTW: VB.NET /is/ more OO, because we have late binding which doesn't
exist in Java ('Option Strict Off').

Well... I guess that is sort of a subjective thing. I'm sure the
Smalltalk guys would agree with you. But, I'm not so sure I do.

 

[Alexandre Moura]

--------------------

Thread-Topic: Do I need to know Visual Basic inorder to learn VB.Net ?
thread-index: AcQRKruXcfM9sbIvRpG0tn6ozdHwhA==
X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.vb
From: "=?Utf-8?B?RGF2aWQ=?=" <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>

Subject: Re: Do I need to know Visual Basic inorder to learn VB.Net ?
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 15:01:10 -0800
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="Utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Newsreader: Microsoft CDO for Windows 2000
Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message
Importance: normal
Priority: normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.3790.0
Newsgroups: microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.vb
Path: cpmsftngxa06.phx.gbl
Xref: cpmsftngxa06.phx.gbl microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.vb:190560
NNTP-Posting-Host: tk2msftcmty1.phx.gbl 10.40.1.180
X-Tomcat-NG: microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.vb

Absolutely.

1) The code modules are separate and organized much better. I do not like
the fact that a forms code module is one long code module separated by
lines and the routines are all willy nilly.

2) In VB6, there is better control in the design environment over the
controls. Moving controls and placing them on a form is a pain in the ass
in VB.NET, unless I am doing something wrong.

3) I would really like to be able to view two different procedures from two
different forms/modules at the same friggin time.

I'm certain I will become more comfortable with the way VB.NET does things
in the long run. VB.NET is obviously a better language but the IDE is
lacking, probably because it has to cater to all the different languages in
a similar manner.

David

Only a solution for #3, but open both files, then right click on one of
those files's tab and select new horizontal tab group.