VB or C?

[Guest]

Fact Poll

I made the transition from (Borland) C++ to VB.NET around 2004. I have been
happy with the choice. I find I can focus more on the problem and less on
being "tidy" with VB.

But, I fear that many don't take VB.NET seriously, particularly in
scientific programming. They ask; "What do you code in?" and you say;
"VB.NET." Conversation over.

I also fear that the technological tide may turn away from VB back towards C
- sending VB the way of the Sony betamax, Mac, and Dodo.

What are the facts? What are the advantages of C in terms of stability,
flexibility, and overall power? What about the long term trend? What is the
apparent emerging language today.

I kinow everyone is busy. I don't mean to waste anyone's time. I ask because
I am at a crossroads, embarking on a huge task. I want to be using the most
vital language. What better place to ask?


mark b

 

[Scott M.]

Well, first off, I think you mean C#, rather than C, right? Because if you
do, in fact, mean C, then there are tremeandous differences. VB .NET is a
..NET language (obviously) and so all the advantages of .NET vs. COM come
into play (versioning/DLL Hell issues, deployment issues, the whole web
development/web services issue, caching, etc.).

If you do mean C# instead, then the differences between it and VB .NET are
minimal. You can do a Google search on VB.NET vs. C# and come up with all
kinds of articles (even from Microsoft) stating this. When comparing one
..NET language against another, the choice comes down to preference. In a
corporate environment, it comes down to the existing in-house skill set and
the amount of re-training the staff would need to become
productive/efficient in a new language. The differences between C# and VB
..NET are, largely, minor and don't come into play in huge ways for most
applications.

Lastly, anyone who would end a conversation about development languages
after you tell them you use VB .NET, should be ignored since they obviously
are not educated as to what a powerfull langugage VB .NET is. It's not your
father's VB 6.0 - it is leaps and bounds better, on par with any other OOP
language.

 

[Guest]

Hi Mark,

This is a Common Question that i heared between alot of deveolpers.

In Fact, After .Net Technology has see the light. it Gathered all
programming languages ( Like C, VB ) in one Base; which is the .Net
Framework. All the programming languages now using the same Basis.

So, it reffers to the developer background; if it is C, or VB, or .... what
are you familiar with!?

This will simplify the developer job, instead of forcing him/her to use the
same programming language.

This is my own openion!

Regards,
Husam Al-A'araj

 

[Guest]

I made the transition from (Borland) C++ to VB.NET around 2004. I have been
happy with the choice. I find I can focus more on the problem and less on
being "tidy" with VB.

But, I fear that many don't take VB.NET seriously, particularly in
scientific programming. They ask; "What do you code in?" and you say;
"VB.NET." Conversation over.

I also fear that the technological tide may turn away from VB back towards C
- sending VB the way of the Sony betamax, Mac, and Dodo.

What are the facts? What are the advantages of C in terms of stability,
flexibility, and overall power? What about the long term trend? What is the
apparent emerging language today.

I kinow everyone is busy. I don't mean to waste anyone's time. I ask because
I am at a crossroads, embarking on a huge task. I want to be using the most
vital language. What better place to ask?

(I assume you mean C# not C)

If job adds is a good indicator of language usage then
C# usage outnumber VB.NET usage 3:1.

It is also my impression that it is much more common to
teach C# than VB.NET at very educations.

But there are still a lot of VB.NET code out
there now and will be too in the future.

I would not consider using VB.NET a risk for the project
long term.

Arne

 

[Scott M.]

In Fact, After .Net Technology has see the light. it Gathered all

programming languages ( Like C, VB ) in one Base; which is the .Net
Framework. All the programming languages now using the same Basis.

Well, there's a bit more to it than this. The .NET Framework consits of a
Common Language Runtime that only understands how to process native machine
code (not VB.NET, C#, J# or C++). There are language-specific comilers that
are part of the Framework and these compilers translate the original
language used into Intermediate Language (IL). The first user to use an
application will cause the Framework to translate the IL to native machine
code for the CLR to execute. The Framework also consists of a huge set of
base classes (not languages) that can be used, regardless of the particular
language the developer is using.

The Framework (and more specifically) the Common Language Runtime (CLR) is
built on something called the Common Language Specification, which sets some
ground rules that all .NET languages must follow. This CLS includes, yet
another component called the Common Type System (which says that all .NET
languages must have equivelant data types).

So, I would not say that the Framework is just a base language for all other
..NET language. That's a bit of an over simplification (and I have also left
out several other aspects of the Framework for brevity).

But, hopefully, this will shed light on why all .NET languages are more/less
on equal footing.

 

[Scott M.]

If job adds is a good indicator of language usage then

C# usage outnumber VB.NET usage 3:1.

So, you've seen *all* the .NET programming job ads and made this 3:1 based
on that? I think this value is highly speculative and can't be determined
unequivacly.

It is also my impression that it is much more common to
teach C# than VB.NET at very educations.

See my first comment.

But there are still a lot of VB.NET code out
there now and will be too in the future.

Very true. In fact, since VB (6 and lower) as well as VBA have been around
for so long that VB .NET will have a very safe future for these two reasons.

Many folks are hesitant to re-write something from scratch, rather than
upgrade it to a newer version.
There are so many VB 6 developers out there already that may not be willing
or able (or it just may not be practicle) to start all over with a new
language.

I would not consider using VB.NET a risk for the project
long term.

Your opinion and you are entitled to it.

 

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?=]

So, you've seen *all* the .NET programming job ads and made this 3:1 based
on that? I think this value is highly speculative and can't be determined
unequivacly.

No.

But I know how to use the search field in a job database and
see the hit count in the result.

Today dice.com gives:

C# - 6867
VB.NET - 2512

(that is 2.73:1)

See my first comment.

That is a more qualitative assessment.

But I think it is valid.

Your opinion and you are entitled to it.

Apparently also your opinion.

Or did you no read what I actually wrote ?

Arne

 

[Scott M.]

Inline....

No.

But I know how to use the search field in a job database and
see the hit count in the result.

Today dice.com gives:

C# - 6867
VB.NET - 2512

(that is 2.73:1)

Ok, one jobs search engine down, 435,000 to go.

That is a more qualitative assessment.

But I think it is valid.

Why? I own & operate an IT training firm (http://TechTrainSolutions.com)
and I get far more request for VB .NET training than I do for C# with
customers just moving to .NET. Now, I'm not going to say that it is or it
isn't true that C# is taught more than VB .NET or vice versa (even though I
think I might be more qualified to say this) because I am but one training
provider. What's your impression based on?

Apparently also your opinion.

Or did you no read what I actually wrote ?

Of course I did. Did you? There's nothing wrong with passing along an
opinion, but don't dress it up as a fact. I disputed your 3:1 statistic
because looking at one job site out of thousands does not a reliable
statistic make.

I also just pressed you on your impression that C# is taught more readily
than VB .NET - I didn't say you were wrong (did you read what I wrote?), I
just asked for why you had this impression.

Your third point, I agreed with.

As for your last comment (your opinion), I did not object at all. I merely
point out that it is an opinion.

So what, exactly, is wrong with my comments?

 

[Mark Rae]

But, I fear that many don't take VB.NET seriously, particularly in
scientific programming. They ask; "What do you code in?" and you say;
"VB.NET." Conversation over.

Someone posted a link a while back to an article claiming that there are no
true VB.NET "developers" because the entire Basic collection of languages
allows for so much sloppiness and lack of structure - something like that,
anyway...

Can't find it at the moment - does anyone remember the post I'm talking
about...?

 

[Tom Dacon]

Can't find it at the moment - does anyone remember the post I'm talking

about...?

Kind of glad you can't find it.

That attitude is complete nonsense.

Tom Dacon
Dacon Software Consulting
(C#, VB.Net, ex-C++, ex-C developer)

 

[Scott M.]

I agree, you can write sloppy code in any language. Plus, I'm quite sure
that what you are reffing to was about VB 6.0, not VB .NET.

 

[Mark Rae]

Kind of glad you can't find it.

That attitude is complete nonsense.

Found it: http://www.codeproject.com/dotnet/CSharpVersusVB.asp

Superb!

 

[Scott M.]

This article is solely based on the veiwpoint that the VB .NET *culture* is
sub-standard to C#. It makes many assumptions and many statements, which
are entirely subjective. In short, it should be taken with a grain of salt.

Now, if the article was talking about VB 6.0, I'd more inclined to agree
(more, but not completely) with *some* of it's presumptions, but it does
not.

As I said earlier, you can write poor code in any language.

 

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?=]

Ok, one jobs search engine down, 435,000 to go.

That was the US.

UK (ItJobWatch):

C# 26956
VB.NET 8012

ratio 3.36:1

Germany (Monster):

C# 511
VB.NET 91

ratio 5.62:1

See the trend ?

Why? I own & operate an IT training firm (http://TechTrainSolutions.com)
and I get far more request for VB .NET training than I do for C# with
customers just moving to .NET. Now, I'm not going to say that it is or it
isn't true that C# is taught more than VB .NET or vice versa (even though I
think I might be more qualified to say this) because I am but one training
provider. What's your impression based on?

Based on hearing from students at various levels (when they ask
for help in various fora).

After spending 2 seconds reading your home page then it
appears to me that you are not teaching IT students but
teaching IT professionals. Different market.

Of course I did. Did you? There's nothing wrong with passing along an
opinion, but don't dress it up as a fact. I disputed your 3:1 statistic
because looking at one job site out of thousands does not a reliable
statistic make.

Who said that it was based at looking at one job site ????

I have made the test at some of them frequently over some years.

I also just pressed you on your impression that C# is taught more readily
than VB .NET - I didn't say you were wrong (did you read what I wrote?), I
just asked for why you had this impression.

Answered above.

So what, exactly, is wrong with my comments?

I don't think it is common to ask for evidence for this type
of statements unless you think the posted summaries were false.

Arne

 

[Mark Rae]

UK (JobServe)

C# - 2,599
http://www.jobserve.com/results.asp...order=Rank&all=on&cb01=1&dt=1&ps=20&x=34&y=16

VB.NET - 779
http://www.jobserve.com/results.asp...t"&page=1&order=Rank&all=on&cb01=1&dt=1&ps=20

 

[Scott M.]

3 sites out of thousands make a trend?

That was the US.

UK (ItJobWatch):

C# 26956
VB.NET 8012

ratio 3.36:1

Germany (Monster):

C# 511
VB.NET 91

ratio 5.62:1

See the trend ?


Based on hearing from students at various levels (when they ask
for help in various fora).

After spending 2 seconds reading your home page then it
appears to me that you are not teaching IT students but
teaching IT professionals. Different market.


Who said that it was based at looking at one job site ????

I have made the test at some of them frequently over some years.


Answered above.


I don't think it is common to ask for evidence for this type
of statements unless you think the posted summaries were false.

Arne

 

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Arne_Vajh=F8j?=]

3 sites out of thousands make a trend?

Yes.

Because the jobs at the thousand job sites are not
distinct.

Those 3 cover a pretty big chunk of the UK, US and
German job market.

But if you continue to be skeptical then lookup
at some of the other job sites yourself.

Arne

 

[RobinS]

This has been asked a gazillion times. Try searching this group and
microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.vb. Do we have to rehash this over and
over again?

Robin S.

 

[Guest]

Yes Robin, this forum is for the interchange of ideas and knowledge. I need
the current trend in thought here and that is why I asked today.

It may not be important to you and if it isn't then selectively ignore it
and lighten up a bit.

 

[Scott M.]

Yes.

???? Not a chance.

Because the jobs at the thousand job sites are not
distinct.

How so?

Those 3 cover a pretty big chunk of the UK, US and
German job market.

Well, I would say they cover the jobs that have been submitted to that
particular site, not nearly all jobs in any one market.

But if you continue to be skeptical then lookup
at some of the other job sites yourself.

Why should I? You are the one making this claim and I am simply pointing
out that based on your "evidence", your claim is useless.