Is learning VB6 now a complete waste of time?

  • (8 Pages)
  • +
  • « First
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • Last »

109 Replies - 44403 Views - Last Post: 08 January 2014 - 04:44 AM Rate Topic: -----

#46 trevster344  Icon User is offline

  • The Peasant
  • member icon

Reputation: 224
  • View blog
  • Posts: 1,505
  • Joined: 16-March 11

Re: Is learning VB6 now a complete waste of time?

Posted 19 November 2012 - 10:07 AM

View PostBobRodes, on 13 November 2012 - 01:08 PM, said:

Trevster, the idea that VB6 is not an object-oriented language and VB.Net is is not entirely accurate. VB6 has (nearly) all of the characteristics of OO except white box reuse. Most people who say that VB6 is "not an OO language" say so because of this missing characteristic. However, VB6 is definitely "oriented" to the use of "objects."


Oh I know it's an Object Oriented Language all in its own. I didn't mean it that way Bob. What I meant is the presence of the fundamentals is definitely not as blatant as in VB.Net. :)
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#47 BobRodes  Icon User is offline

  • Your Friendly Local Curmudgeon
  • member icon

Reputation: 574
  • View blog
  • Posts: 2,989
  • Joined: 19-May 09

Re: Is learning VB6 now a complete waste of time?

Posted 19 November 2012 - 08:24 PM

View Posttrevster344, on 19 November 2012 - 11:07 AM, said:

View PostBobRodes, on 13 November 2012 - 01:08 PM, said:

Trevster, the idea that VB6 is not an object-oriented language and VB.Net is is not entirely accurate. VB6 has (nearly) all of the characteristics of OO except white box reuse. Most people who say that VB6 is "not an OO language" say so because of this missing characteristic. However, VB6 is definitely "oriented" to the use of "objects."


Oh I know it's an Object Oriented Language all in its own. I didn't mean it that way Bob. What I meant is the presence of the fundamentals is definitely not as blatant as in VB.Net. :)/>

Well, yes. :)
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#48 BobRodes  Icon User is offline

  • Your Friendly Local Curmudgeon
  • member icon

Reputation: 574
  • View blog
  • Posts: 2,989
  • Joined: 19-May 09

Re: Is learning VB6 now a complete waste of time?

Posted 19 November 2012 - 08:34 PM

View Postraziel_, on 19 November 2012 - 03:09 AM, said:

@BobRodes everyone can look at VB6 as it wants. You can look at it as Object Oriented which in a way is given that you can initialize classes forms etc. It dose not have inheritance and/or polymorphism but if you want to look at it as a Object Oriented is fine by anyone as much as you want. :)/>/>/>/>

Actually, that's not entirely accurate--polymorphism is alive and well in VB6. Have a look at this:
'a Public class called iAnimal
Public Sub Move()

End Sub

Public Sub Bite()

End Sub

'Now, a class called Flea, set to PublicNotCreateable
Implements iAnimal

Private Sub iAnimal_Move
msgbox "boing boing"
End sub

Private Sub iAnimal_Bite
msgbox "nip"
End Sub

'And a class called TRex, also PublicNotCreateable
Implements iAnimal

Private Sub iAnimal_Move
msgbox "KABOOOMMMM....KABOOOMMMM...."
End sub

Private Sub iAnimal_Bite
msgbox "CRRRUUNNNNCCCHHHH"
End Sub

'Now, a client

Public Sub cmdAnimal_Click()
dim x as iAnimal
dim y as iAnimal
set x = new Flea
set y = new TRex
x.move
x.bite
y.move
y.bite
End Sub
As you can see if you try out this code, polymorphism and black box reuse ("interface inheritance", in Microsoft marketspeak) are clearly supported by VB6.

This post has been edited by BobRodes: 20 November 2012 - 08:04 AM

Was This Post Helpful? 1
  • +
  • -

#49 martinp  Icon User is offline

  • New D.I.C Head

Reputation: 0
  • View blog
  • Posts: 1
  • Joined: 22-November 12

Re: Is learning VB6 now a complete waste of time?

Posted 22 November 2012 - 02:50 PM

My understanding is that VB6 is very close to VBScript? Although I'd rather not code in either, unfortunately, I'm an automated tester. And, the tools of testers are pathetically behind the times. QTP, the industry leader >USD10,000 per install, still uses VBScript. Not legacy code, but a legacy application. :(/>
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#50 BobRodes  Icon User is offline

  • Your Friendly Local Curmudgeon
  • member icon

Reputation: 574
  • View blog
  • Posts: 2,989
  • Joined: 19-May 09

Re: Is learning VB6 now a complete waste of time?

Posted 01 December 2012 - 12:20 PM

VBScript is a subset of VB6. For example, all variables are of Variant type, and you can't build COM components with it.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#51 Rishif2  Icon User is offline

  • New D.I.C Head

Reputation: -1
  • View blog
  • Posts: 2
  • Joined: 10-December 12

Re: Is learning VB6 now a complete waste of time?

Posted 10 December 2012 - 08:47 PM

according to me vb6 is very useful for new programmer (Beginners).
although microsoft has released VS 2012 but vb6 is still in fashion due to its flexiblity.
i know that after getting into vb.net , C# you will say that vb6 is not in treand but it is oops based and really roboust language.
so as conclusion i can say that you can opt vb.net , c# and if you are advanced OOPS programmer than J# also. but cannot say that learning vb6 is waste of time.
Was This Post Helpful? -1
  • +
  • -

#52 Curtis Rutland  Icon User is online

  • (╯□)╯︵ (~ .o.)~
  • member icon


Reputation: 4488
  • View blog
  • Posts: 7,816
  • Joined: 08-June 10

Re: Is learning VB6 now a complete waste of time?

Posted 10 December 2012 - 08:57 PM

Quote

vb6 is still in fashion due to its flexiblity


VB6 is in fashion because it's deeply embedded into a ridiculous amount of businesses, not because it's flexible. VB.NET is way more flexible in its uses than VB6, considering WPF, WCF, ASP.NET, ASP.NET MVC, WinForms, Windows Services, Console, Windows Phone 7, Windows Phone 8, Windows Store Style, Windows Workflow, etc...can all be made with .NET

Quote

if you are advanced OOPS programmer than J# also


That's just nonsense. J# hasn't been supported or updated for a long time. It was completely abandoned.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#53 cfoley  Icon User is online

  • Cabbage
  • member icon

Reputation: 1992
  • View blog
  • Posts: 4,144
  • Joined: 11-December 07

Re: Is learning VB6 now a complete waste of time?

Posted 11 December 2012 - 01:05 AM

Quote

you will say that vb6 is not in treand but it is oops based


oops  
/o͝ops/
Exclamation
Used to show recognition of a mistake or minor accident, often as part of an apology.


Yes, yes it is.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#54 Cooldude68  Icon User is offline

  • New D.I.C Head

Reputation: 0
  • View blog
  • Posts: 6
  • Joined: 17-October 11

Re: Is learning VB6 now a complete waste of time?

Posted 27 December 2012 - 10:25 AM

Anybody that says VB6 is out of date has his/her reasons but for me, its the best i mean the best place to start for a learner.
Its easier to code and it also does wonderful things.
I have some close to me that has developed a bucketload of applications using VB6.
Student result-processing system, chat application, payroll softwares e.t.c
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#55 Curtis Rutland  Icon User is online

  • (╯□)╯︵ (~ .o.)~
  • member icon


Reputation: 4488
  • View blog
  • Posts: 7,816
  • Joined: 08-June 10

Re: Is learning VB6 now a complete waste of time?

Posted 27 December 2012 - 12:19 PM

Quote

its the best i mean the best place to start for a learner


And I keep telling you people that it's a terrible idea to start with. There's literally no reason to start teaching students VB6 when there are other languages that are just as simple, just as flexible, and not 15 years out of date. VB6 hasn't been updated and won't ever be updated again. Why not start learning a language that's actually current? For example, you can do anything with Python that you can with VB6, it's just as easy to learn (easier maybe) and is currently supported and developed. Or VB.NET. Or Ruby. Or anything not VB6.

Classic VB programming has its place. Legacy work. That's it. Every new application written in VB6 is one that should have been written in something else.
Was This Post Helpful? 2
  • +
  • -

#56 cstrouse  Icon User is offline

  • New D.I.C Head

Reputation: 1
  • View blog
  • Posts: 2
  • Joined: 06-January 13

Re: Is learning VB6 now a complete waste of time?

Posted 06 January 2013 - 11:11 PM

View PostCurtis Rutland, on 08 November 2012 - 07:16 AM, said:

I see VB6 as the new COBOL. Something that nobody (in the west) teaches, but will be a required skill for lots of jobs for many years to come. All because of deeply embedded legacy systems.

Learning it now would be useful if you want a job doing that: maintaining or porting legacy systems. I would think people would learn it out of necessity when they're tasked with that, not seek it out. If you want to make new applications professionally, VB6 is unlikely to be something that gives your resume a boost, considering just how far out of date it actually is.

Quote

the ease of creating and using COM objects, and the ease of creating wrappers for the Win32 API


I wouldn't know about COM, but I do know that P/Invoke is just the bee's knees for Win32 interop. It's pretty simple for VB.NET/C# to wrap Win32, so that's not really an advantage for classic VB.


I've seen quite a few mission critical business apps written in VB6 at organizations that don't have the resources in terms of money, time, or available staff to port the application over to .NET and fix whatever bugs pop up and replace custom controls and such. I also know some hardcore VB6 developers who love it because it feels faster to than .NET without all of the .NET framework overhead.
Was This Post Helpful? 1
  • +
  • -

#57 diegosendra  Icon User is offline

  • New D.I.C Head

Reputation: 0
  • View blog
  • Posts: 19
  • Joined: 24-June 13

Re: Is learning VB6 now a complete waste of time?

Posted 24 June 2013 - 03:04 PM

Hi everyone

This matter goes beyond VB6, this is about IT common tendency to just 'change without a valid reason other than keeping the big corporations on top of the wave'. Well, let me tell you something. When you have a business running and are in your mid-40s, you just don't have the time to stay up-to-date with the latest scream of IT industry. You simply don't buy the pill. You don't need to defy yourself learning new things as when you was a kid. When you are in your mid-40s and own a biz you need to take care of the products you have already developed since years, better worrying on updates, logistics, packaging, marketing issues, billing issues, strategy issues; simply have little time for changing because others want you to change. Not to mention you have a wife and kids you need to take care of too

This said, you couldn't care the less if a new PHP framework came out like Yii and then you are said 'you have to port everything you've been developing since the last 5 years in PHP to it because it's the latest trend!. The same applies to VB6. Migrating it to .NET is far from easy, .NET is a totally different thing. Well, as a business man and coder myself since nearly 20 years now let me tell you new coders something: what makes a good program is the programmer and the software design, the anticipation to problems; not the language you use. And for this reason, VB6 is useful, as much useful as Pascal was back in 1994 and even Clipper 5.1. Then MS came out and said: DOS is dead buddies, Windows is here. But you can't deny me that you couldn't still make fully-business-based programs in Pascal/C and/or Clipper even nowadays. Of course, if Windows would have support for old DOS-based EXEs.

Quote

That said, Visual Basic is still useful because one can develop apps very quickly with it with little overhead or complexity added (such as VB.NET).


As this user said, this is specially the reason why the 'latest brand-new thing' doesn't necessarily means that it's good, or simply that it isn't enough ball-busting to switch to/port everything we have to. I mean, you can't migrate your whole company packages which are on production just because MS wants and/or anyone else wants.

Quote

I own a company that develops and sells a software product made with VB6, our sales are close to 1 mil a year and I see no reason to switch to .net. The time it would take to port the code would be unacceptable, and the end result would be a buggy, bloated, slow program that has no additional features for our customers. Besides from my experience with MS and their "this is the platform of the future" today then obsolete tomorrow, I would never put that much time into going to another MS development platform. If we ever do change it will not be to anything produced by MS.


Brilliant. I couldn't agree more with this other user

Our suggestion: Don't buy the pill of these big corporations that come out every 6-months trying to stay on top of the wave. They have their business needs too that they follow. For those new programmers out learning programming today I'd suggest you master a language, don't be a jack-of-all-trades. We are still selling VB6 apps in 2013, at the time of writing this article I am in the middle of development of a VB6-based app

Cheers

Diego Sendra

This post has been edited by Curtis Rutland: 24 June 2013 - 04:03 PM
Reason for edit:: Removed contact information. Put that on your profile page if you want people to contact you.

Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#58 modi123_1  Icon User is offline

  • Suitor #2
  • member icon



Reputation: 9201
  • View blog
  • Posts: 34,575
  • Joined: 12-June 08

Re: Is learning VB6 now a complete waste of time?

Posted 24 June 2013 - 03:13 PM

That's all good and dandy to not hitch a ride and jerk to every hurk of new framework/apis that come in, but at some point you will have to move, right? Why are you on VB6 and not VB4, or indeed - PASCAL? It's an interestingly regressive argument - especially when one is arguing from a product that had the sunset walk back in April of 2008. Sure.. sure.. I've had a job or two where I had to kick around a COBOL app, but those are only as secure as the hardware that lasts it. The decision to stop updating the environment was made long ago.

So sure.. you can still use VB6 apps and you can certainly start there, but why? If you were not burdened with legacy code (and indeed VB6 is now legacy) then why start there?
Was This Post Helpful? 1
  • +
  • -

#59 diegosendra  Icon User is offline

  • New D.I.C Head

Reputation: 0
  • View blog
  • Posts: 19
  • Joined: 24-June 13

Re: Is learning VB6 now a complete waste of time?

Posted 24 June 2013 - 03:39 PM

View Postmodi123_1, on 24 June 2013 - 03:13 PM, said:

That's all good and dandy to not hitch a ride and jerk to every hurk of new framework/apis that come in, but at some point you will have to move, right? Why are you on VB6 and not VB4, or indeed - PASCAL?


Because simply VB6 and VB4 are the same, we didn't have to learn new things, we don't use classes in VB6 either. We focus in be better PROGRAMMERS, yes, our programs are really much cleaner and clearer to what we coded back in VB3 in 1995 compared to the quality of the code we do now in VB6 in 2013. Why we are not coding in PASCAL? Simply because Microsoft convinced people that text-mode computing is not cool and 'HARD'

Quote

So sure.. you can still use VB6 apps and you can certainly start there, but why? If you were not burdened with legacy code (and indeed VB6 is now legacy) then why start there?


The time when we will effectively move into .NET will be IF AND ONLY IF latest Window versions won't natively run VB6 EXEs anymore; other than that I see no other reason to migrate. We are a business, not a bunch of programmers trying to learn new things because we want to stay on top of the trend :)

And honestly, customers care on the application delivered. They care little if you did it in Pascal, GWBasic, Quickbasic, Cobol, Fortran, name whatever you like. Of course, I understand you can't pick a job if you are not up-to-date with languages, and that's another reason why we don't grab the newspaper since a long long time ago to seek for job
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#60 Curtis Rutland  Icon User is online

  • (╯□)╯︵ (~ .o.)~
  • member icon


Reputation: 4488
  • View blog
  • Posts: 7,816
  • Joined: 08-June 10

Re: Is learning VB6 now a complete waste of time?

Posted 24 June 2013 - 04:21 PM

Quote

yes, our programs are really much cleaner and clearer to what we coded back in VB3 in 1995 compared to the quality of the code we do now in VB6 in 2013


I can make the same argument that the code we write in VB.NET 2012 is really much cleaner and clearer than your code in VB6, but that would be a dumb argument. Those are qualitative measures, so there's no way to actually say if one language's code is "cleaner" than the other. You're right that it is all about programmer skill, but I submit that with better tools, good programmers can produce better results. Modi's right. Your reductive argument disproves itself if taken to its logical extent.

I also take issue with the way you imply that anyone using a reasonably new language or framework is trying to be trendy. Some of us have real passion for our work. We don't want to learn to impress others, we want to learn because we actually enjoy the process of learning. And many of us are professionals at the same time. I've been programming professionally for a good long time myself, so you can't really pull the "we are a business" stuff with me, because I work for a business. We're using .NET 4.5 not because we want to be cool, but because we really appreciate the features that come with it (mostly for ASP.NET MVC4).

And I don't think anyone in this thread is making an argument to port all your old work. That's pointless and wasteful. However, each new product you make in VB6 is one that I could make a case for being written in .NET. I can give you several points just off the top of my head as to why:

  • Portability with Mono
  • Access to a much more powerful layout engine (WPF)
  • The ability to write web services
  • Microsoft Support (VB6 is long since unsupported, and unpatched)
  • Security (same reason: .NET is constantly patched, any exploits in VB6 will remain unpatched)
  • Updated tools (VS 2012 has come so far from the old Visual Studios)
  • Interoperability with .NET (VB.NET assemblies can be referenced by any .NET language for any .NET framework


That's all from the top of my head, I'm sure there are plenty more.

The only reasons I've seen in this whole thread for using VB6 are:

  • I don't feel like learning a new language or programming style
  • .NET is hard (nonsense by the way)
  • I can still get my work done in VB6


None of those are positive reasons. They're all excuses! Basically, you haven't given anyone a good reason to use VB6. You've given excuses to stick with it, but if you read the thread title, the question is about new programmers learning it. Which I am still firmly 100% against. Just because you're stuck in the past isn't a good reason to urge others to remain there.

BTW, after re-reading this post, it came off with a far more aggressive tone than I intended. I don't mean any disrespect, I just get passionate about my arguments.

Edit: I remember another reason that came up: "our clients computers are too old to run .NET". That's a great argument. So if that's relevant, then by all means, use VB6.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

  • (8 Pages)
  • +
  • « First
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • Last »