[ianfernite]

I took an intro VB.net course last year, and I 'forgot' to return the textbook. Should I bother with furthering my knowledge, or should I focus on C++?

[pr4y]

You should atleast get comfortable with the majority of the framework. If you can "master" the framework and how routines and class structure works then you can do anything, its just a matter of finding the definitions for certain functions.

As far as long term goal / focus I'd definitely concentrate a lot more on C++ as it is in some respects the industry standard for knowledge when you are looking for a job in the force.



Just my 2 cents.

[modi123_1]

VB.NET's great, but in your case I would focus on C# or C++ for the fundamentals... then pick up VB.NET at your leisure.

[WolfCoder]

C, C++, and JAVA are very widely used.

[ianfernite]

Alright, thank you all for your input!

[Locke]

I'll also chime in on the C# note. (HAHAHAHA, music pun)

C# is more widely used than VB.NET. I think VB.NET would be easier to get familiar with the framework before actually learning C#. If you use the .NET part of C#, then all of the functions, namespaces and such will be the same (except for a few, I believe).

So I think the .NET framework is worth mastering. Not necessarily VB.NET. I know enough VB.NET to get me by, and I like using it every once in a while. But ever since I picked up C#, I use that more than VB.

Hope this helps!

[Raynes]

VB.NET and VB in general are awful languages. I really see no need to continue study on this particular language because I honestly feel you'll never need it, and even if you do, it wont be important.

[PsychoCoder]

@Raynes: I would have to respectfully disagree, in part anyways. VB6 is almost worthless, but not VB.NET. VB.NET is actually a nice OO language that can do anything that C# (or any of the .Net languages) can do, especially considering they have the same Namespaces, classes, methods, properties, etc.

I can go to somewhere like Monster.Com and find you almost as many VB.NET jobs as I can C# jobs, so your statement is actually false. In the area I live in there are actually more VB.NET positions than there are C# jobs, so learning VB.NET would be a good thing.

[Raynes]

PsychoCoder, on 14 Feb, 2009 - 11:02 PM, said:

@Raynes: I would have to respectfully disagree, in part anyways. VB6 is almost worthless, but not VB.NET. VB.NET is actually a nice OO language that can do anything that C# (or any of the .Net languages) can do, especially considering they have the same Namespaces, classes, methods, properties, etc.

I can go to somewhere like Monster.Com and find you almost as many VB.NET jobs as I can C# jobs, so your statement is actually false. In the area I live in there are actually more VB.NET positions than there are C# jobs, so learning VB.NET would be a good thing.

I have to respectfully and strongly disagree. Have you by any chance ever seen VB.NET code? I mean come on, when you have so many better options, why choose a language that allows you to hang yourself everywhere you turn.

Also how would you call a non-exported __stdcall function in VB.NET?

I have code to back up that it can be done in C#. And if you request it I'll provide it.

This post has been edited by Raynes: 15 February 2009 - 12:12 AM

[PsychoCoder]

Quote

Have you by any chance ever seen VB.NET code?

Considering I have my MCAD & MCSD in both C# and VB.NET, I would say the answer to that is yes I have. I'll give you an assignment, find one thing that can be done in C# that cannot be accomplished in VB.NET (Other than unmanaged code, and if you're working with .Net why the hell you using unmanaged code anyways??!!)

Quote

why choose a language that allows you to hang yourself everywhere you turn.

Technically most, if not all, languages will generously allow you to hang yourself, this isnt a VB.NET specific trait

[Raynes]

PsychoCoder, on 14 Feb, 2009 - 11:21 PM, said:

Quote

Have you by any chance ever seen VB.NET code?

Considering I have my MCAD & MCSD in both C# and VB.NET, I would say the answer to that is yes I have. I'll give you an assignment, find one thing that can be done in C# that cannot be accomplished in VB.NET (Other than unmanaged code, and if you're working with .Net why the hell you using unmanaged code anyways??!!)

The C# code I'm talking about is sickening, but it works, and I'm pretty sure VB.NET doesn't have what is needed to do it. Why are you throwing rules into the mix anyways? Your asking about things VB.NET can't do and limiting my selections? That's not fair man. :\

Here is one: Anonymous Functions

The language is a Turing Tarpit. Features wont change that.

This post has been edited by Raynes: 15 February 2009 - 12:50 AM

[WinBase]

Raynes, on 14 Feb, 2009 - 10:58 PM, said:

VB.NET and VB in general are awful languages. I really see no need to continue study on this particular language because I honestly feel you'll never need it, and even if you do, it wont be important.

why choose a language that allows you to hang yourself everywhere you
turn.

lmao i cant remember hearing so much ignorant & biggoted BS. i never understood why some C programmers somehow think there superior and dont ya know u can write crap code in whatever language u use. personally ive sold what must be over 1000 commercial systems written in variants of VB (vb-dos, vb6 & vb.net) & my customers couldnt give a toss what the language is cos it does what they want. VB.NET is a true OOP language & compiles to IL Code the same as C# and theres no noticable difference in speed, so its all to do with personal preference IMO

[Raynes]

WinBase, on 15 Feb, 2009 - 03:21 AM, said:

Raynes, on 14 Feb, 2009 - 10:58 PM, said:

VB.NET and VB in general are awful languages. I really see no need to continue study on this particular language because I honestly feel you'll never need it, and even if you do, it wont be important.

why choose a language that allows you to hang yourself everywhere you
turn.

lmao i cant remember hearing so much ignorant & biggoted BS. i never understood why some C programmers somehow think there superior and dont ya know u can write crap code in whatever language u use. personally ive sold what must be over 1000 commercial systems written in variants of VB (vb-dos, vb6 & vb.net) & my customers couldnt give a toss what the language is cos it does what they want. VB.NET is a true OOP language & compiles to IL Code the same as C# and theres no noticable difference in speed, so its all to do with personal preference IMO

Excuse me? Is flaming allowed on these forums?

I am a functional programmer, not a C programmer. And I hate people who think that programming is all about the cash and selling the goods. Do some research on VB and you will find that my accusations are correct, I'm not stupid enough to spark random discussions if I'm not real sure of what I'm saying. There is a big difference. Learn about it.

Meanwhile, I'll go write some elegant and concise code in Clojure and Haskell, and even C# or Java, while you continue writing ugly VB programs that "Just work".

[WinBase]

lmao, by saying that:

"while you continue writing ugly VB programs that "Just work"

just proves my point on how ignorant u are with ur pre-concieved ideas, u sound like u just want something to say coz u aint getting enough attention. make a valid point and maybe you may be taken seriously

[Raynes]

WinBase, on 15 Feb, 2009 - 04:27 AM, said:

lmao, by saying that:

"while you continue writing ugly VB programs that "Just work"

just proves my point on how ignorant u are with ur pre-concieved ideas, u sound like u just want something to say coz u aint getting enough attention. make a valid point and maybe you may be taken seriously

How does that prove your point? I'm not sure what is worse, that annoying spelling or the fact that you think that VB code isn't ugly.

Man, I'm done. If people like you reign free on these forums I give up.