Eloquence of Language?

re: Eloquence of Language?

Mike Schinkel — Wed, 14 Jul 2004 09:48:00 GMT

>> I find I have to spend about 30-40% longer staring at a block of VB code to try to figure out exactly what's going on versus C#

Funny, its the exact opposite for me.

But it really is what you get used to.

I have started doing some C# code (working with .Text source code) and I'm actually shocked by some of the things that are missing. A "WITH" construct, for example.

More importantly, the lack of flexibility that C# has when implementing multiple interfaces when compared to VB.NET. I would have assumed C# would provide more power on advanced concepts like interfaces, not less!

Also, and I can't believe I'm mentioning this, when declaring a variable intellisense works a lot better w/VB than C# (i.e. "as " triggers it in VB, but in C# I don't get intellisense when I start to declare a var; or am I doing something wrong?)

But in the final analysis, which language to use it primarily a matter of preference, assuming MS doesn't hamstring one or the other down the road (god I hope not!)

re: Eloquence of Language?

Omer van Kloeten — Tue, 29 Jun 2004 17:04:00 GMT

E.,

I don't like inflammatery comments on my posts. This is not a post to make people diss VB.NET. It's a post to prevent VB.NET programmers from dissing C#.

Please, let's keep it cool. :)

re: Eloquence of Language?

E. — Tue, 29 Jun 2004 10:12:00 GMT

The main reason for not using VB.Net is the stupid syntax, aka DIM SUM and then sum.
Is Nothing ? Are we writing longhand or shorthand what is this crap? I believe the main reason for vb.net's rise was the backward compatibility for old legacy vb programmer, who have to adjust to a new way of thinking - Object Oriented.

re: Eloquence of Language?

Ido Samuelson — Mon, 28 Jun 2004 10:13:00 GMT

I wouldn't call anyone primitive, thats I agree with but dude, you have a p3-800 how the hell ya using c#???? :-D

re: Eloquence of Language?

Chad Myers — Mon, 28 Jun 2004 04:43:00 GMT

The reason I use c-style languages now over VB-style is because I've had to do maintenance programming for VB-style projects before. Aside from all the usual stereotypes of poorly written and architected code, the main problem was that it so hard to see the trees from the forest, so to speak.

Having had to maintain several different projects both in VB.NET and C#, I've found that it's easier for your eye to snap to the CODE, the GUTS, the MEAT so to speak. Since the language constructs in C# are lower-case and terse, but the variable names and method names are PascalCased, they stand out quite vividly from the code. Contrast this to VB.NET where both the Code and the Language blend in together. I find I have to spend about 30-40% longer staring at a block of VB code to try to figure out exactly what's going on versus C# that does the same thing with the same number of actual-lines-of-code (i.e. language fluff removed).

It's just more economical to use C#.