Not Another C# Versus VB Article (It has a lot to say about Anders and Delphi)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Arjang
  • Start date Start date
While I agree with the central premise that the C# "culture" will always be
considered "better" than the VB.Net "culture", the writer of this article
makes leaps of logic that would cause any application he wrote to fail, and
further, goes down the slippery slope of making derogatory comparisons
between "classic" VB and C# rather than between VB.Net and C# (without even
acknowleding to himself that he did so!). Despite the apparent soundness of
his thesis, his logic is extremely faulty.
 
Arjang,

This paragraph in the article shows everything about its quality.
------------
80% of C# programmers are good, while 80% of VB programmers are not good.
This is not to say that everyone who programs in VB is less skilled than
everyone who programs in C#. This is to say that (a) the VB syntax and
semantics is designed to attract less skilled programmers and, in
combination with other factors examined above, this has created a culture
that is populated with less skilled programmers and (b) because VB syntax
and semantics make it more difficult to avoid common programming errors and
hence to program well
-------------.

Beside that the author is comparing Apples with computers, does he in the
rest of is article and his conclusion not take the impact of his sentence.

This sentence of him means that there are enormous much more good VB
programmers than that there are good C# programmers?

This article shows for me something as a person who is in doubt if he took
the right choose, however tries to proof the world that he did.

Cor
 
Yes, I have to admit to being interested with the first few paragraphs but
then thrust into the conclusions well before the arguments or logic merited
any.

Having said that, I have read quite a few articles recently that say a C#
programmer will generally get paid more than a VB.NET programmer. This does
my gnads in slightly, if only because I spent a while trying to persuade my
manager that I should write "this software" in C# as it is functionally the
same as VB.NET, but looks a little more like C++ ;). I failed and now call
myself a VB.NET programmer (as I had to learn one or the other in order to
code it). Should I regret this in the future? I suppose I should learn the
C# syntax - it can't be so difficult, apart from the annoying semi colons I
need at the end of each statement, but as I was previously a C and then C++
programmer, I can't really complain too much about this.

No, thinking about it, the fact that variables are not case sensitive and I
don't need semi colons at the end of statements are perhaps the two major
bonus points of VB.NET over C# ;)
 
Herfried,

The first sentence was in my opinion enough.

Der Artikel ist geprägt von m.E. unzutreffenden Vorurteilen und darauf
basierenden, ebenso inrichtigen Implikationen. Ich habe mir die Mühe
gemacht, die Punkte aus dem Abschnitt "Propagation of Culture in .NET"
genauer anzusehen und zu kommentieren:

:-)

Cor
 
Robin,

In my opinion is there only one big benefit from VBNet above C#, which is
the in my opinion superior IDE from VBNet.

Don't be afraid to start with C# when you know the classes from Net than it
is a piece of cake. You will however be astonished when you have done VBNet
how primitive the IDE from C# is.

Cor
 
Robin,

With the change to get comments from two language sides.

The article is lard by m.E. with not realistic bias and gives therefore the
same results.

I have taken the effort, the points from the part "Propagation of Culture in
..NET" better to investigate and to comment.

Just a try

:-)

Cor
 
In my opinion is there only one big benefit from VBNet above C#, which is
the in my opinion superior IDE from VBNet.
Click to expand...

Yes, it formats and aligns the code. Very good.
Roger
 
Aaron Smith said:
Is the lack of IDE features for C# the same in the VS 2005 Beta 2?
Click to expand...

The IDE support for C# (except the lack of a background-compiler for C#) is
AFAIS better than the support for VB in VS 2005 :-(((.
 
Herfried,
The IDE support for C# (except the lack of a background-compiler for C#)
is AFAIS better than the support for VB in VS 2005 :-(((.
Click to expand...
I find the main point of VBNet, the backgroundcompiler, which include for me
as well autocomplete. What are the new benefits from the IDE from C# that
outclasses VBNet.

Cor
 
Herfried said:
The IDE support for C# (except the lack of a background-compiler for C#)
is AFAIS better than the support for VB in VS 2005 :-(((.
Click to expand...

I had heard a rumor that MS took a lot of time with VB in 2003, but they
were going to catch C# up in 2005. Maybe it wasn't a rumor after all? I
had just heard that a lot of the C# developers were a little mad that
they spent a lot more time refining VB than C#...
 
http://www.codeproject.com/useritems/CSharpVersusVB.asp
Click to expand...
There are a few inaccuracy in the article as regards the history of
Borland Pascal, which it claims was the first commercially available
Pascal.

For the record USCD was available prior to Borland Pascal 3 and of
course Anders and Niels Kompass Pascal 1 and 2 predate Phillipe Kahn
persuading them to remarket the company as Borland (appearing to be
American rather than European) and selling the product cheaply, if I
remember correctly the UK price was £35 as compared to £250 for
version 2, with a restrictive license.

Doug Taylor
 
Cor,

Cor Ligthert said:
I find the main point of VBNet, the backgroundcompiler, which include for
me as well autocomplete. What are the new benefits from the IDE from C#
that outclasses VBNet.
Click to expand...

C# will have much better IntelliSense, more syntax-highlighting and code
formatting options, SmartTags for inserting 'using', ...
 
Back
Top