Visual Basic is Dead!

[Michael J. Ryan]

Believe me, I could have made it far worse. Much more concise than C#
though. Does that make it better? By the way, MUMPS has the most
wonderful use of sparse arrays that I could ever imagine. For all the
advantages that DotNet has, I really miss that. Look at this

Set Person(1, "Address')="1919 Mockingbird Lane"
Set Person(1, "Name")="Smith, John"
Set Person(1,"Phone", "Cell")="917-555-1212"
Set Person(1,"Phone", "Home')="555-555-1111"
Set Person(1,"City")="New York City"

Set PersonXA("Smith","John",1)="" ; this would be the index
pointing to the previous sparse array entry.

Data goes in the subscripts of an array. If the next person entered
doesn't have a cell phone, that array element simply doesn't exist.
Such a cool way to store data.

Well there's always Javascript/JSON...

Person[1] = {
"Address":"1919 Mockingbird Lane",
"Name":"Smith, John",
"Phone":{
"Cell":"917-555-1212",
"Home":"555-555-1111"
},
"City":"New York City"
}

Theres also combine/merge extensions for things like...
Person[2] = Person[2].merge({"City":"Buffalo"});

Ah, I love programming no matter what the language. I even coded in
Cobol and liked that. I didn't know better at the time though. Still,
the level 88s were fun.

Agreed, though I'm a pup by comparison, my first real programming (aside from
macros and dos/bbs scripts) was Javascript in the mid 90's, though I've peaked
at some older stuff, I have to say I like JS and C# most... looking forward to
the changes in C#4 which should make using the DLR really fun. Thinking of
starting a FLOSS Javascript/EcmaScript implementation, including E4X... It
just seems the MS Managed JScript library is getting no love... ben peaking at
the IronPython and IronRuby implementations, and should be an interesting
learning exercise... Without a formal CS background I've never written a
parser; though, I've got a pretty good grasp on the expression trees for DLR
execution.

--
Michael J. Ryan - http://tracker1.info/

.... B5: The bitch of it is that you probably did the right thing. But you did
it in the wrong way. In the inconvenient way. Now you have to pay the penalty
for that. I know it stinks, but that's the way it is.

 

[Michael J. Ryan]

+1, BASIC dialect will most likely remain with us for a very long time.
I keep thinking "Maybe" we should switch our embedded server langager to
V8 (Google Javascript dialect used in Chrome), but we use the basic
BASIC dialect for marketing reasons - most people understand it.

After VS10, you can just use the DLR, and allow for VBx, Managed JScript,
IronRuby & IronPython...

--
Michael J. Ryan - http://tracker1.info/

.... B5: Then what kind of head of security would I be if I let people like me
know things that I'm not supposed to know? I know what I know because I have
to know it. And if I don't have to know it, I don't tell me, and I don't let
anyone else tell me either.

 

[Timothy Casey]

[Snip]

Good show Timothy. Very good recollection of related computer history.

I think that VB will probably evolve into the programming equivalent of
"English" because it is used more often in reliable communications
regarding programming methods.

+1, BASIC dialect will most likely remain with us for a very long time. I
keep thinking "Maybe" we should switch our embedded server langager to V8
(Google Javascript dialect used in Chrome), but we use the basic BASIC
dialect for marketing reasons - most people understand it.

However, we have also been moving back and forth and closer towards
interpreted languages, dynamic programming, auto construction and
execution is once again becoming feasible. The Hardware speeds pretty much
flatten out. That has always been the ultimate direction, it came, it
went, and languages like JavaScript and Prototyping methods, along with
other symbolic conceptual methods is bringing back the basic ideas.

[SNIP]

It all comes down to usage. I expect that BASIC will inherit a few of the
technical functions of C (like perhaps the compiler in VC) and I suspect
some aspects of Java are trickling in too. The most successful language is
the one that seems most familiar to everyone. In time, every programming
language you've ever heard of will be killed off by the NLP (Natural
Language Processor). A proper NLP will eliminate the coding step and allow
compilation to proceed directly from the specification. Fluency in English
will one day pay very well because advanced NLP compilers will eventually be
capable of modeling and compiling a working prototype directly from the work
breakdown. Basic NLP will make the difference between Google's word for word
auto-translator (which has been a wonderful cross-cultural ice-breaker) and
the kind of auto-translator that only errs only on idiom and is better at
optical character recognition than a competent human cryptographer. Do you
think the person who solves all the conundrums necessary to invent the NLP
would want to write it in an interpreted language?

Compiled code will always be faster, and this is important when performing
high intensity functions such as near match (executing a number of lines of
code equal to 32 times the number of bytes being searched times the square
of the length of the search string). Even with multiple core processing,
independent drives with separate reading arms for caching, application
access, and data access; getting completion times down to milliseconds could
prove a challenge over 150Mb of random length records (300-600 Mb in Unicode
depending on whether you use 16 or 32 bit and if you are talking about
formatted documents this equates to 250, 500, or 1000 Mb depending on
whether you are encoding 150mb unformatted ASCII in formatted; UTF-8,
UTF-16, or UTF-32). Whether the code is interpreted or compiled could spell
the difference between comfortable use and product unmerchantability.

When programmers go independent, the first thing they look for is a compiler
in their language. No-one making a living in shareware wants their source
code cut and paste into someone-else's application - even if it is simply an
adaption of well known techniques into something new with no real trade
secrets (eg. most content managers). When ISVs use interpreters it is the
original developer that always loses out because all the work and investment
is made by the original developer - whereas the reverse engineers get a
finished product they can license in their own names for next to nothing.
Only large corporations such as Honeywell can afford to have investigators
track hallmarks and pursue a legal remedy for such violations of copyright.
It's never so simple in compiled object code. This need to keep one's code
out of the open source domain is what makes third party .NET compilers such
as Dotnet Reactor so popular, and why interpreted code is always very bad
news for ISVs (Independent Software Vendors: people who develop, market, and
sell their own products as finished packages - eg. shareware vendors).

Interpreters are great if you want to write in-house or open source
products. However, interpreters make it cheaper to violate copyright and
vastly more expensive to protect copyright of commercial software directly
exposed to the open market. So if you're in business for yourself, and you
haven't signed away your right to own intellectual property, compilers are
the cheapest way to make reverse engineering more expensive.

 

[Mike]

"Visual Basic Soul is in our of us"...

What does that mean...?

Oops

"Visual Basic Soul is in ALL of us"...

 

[Mike]

It all comes down to usage. I expect that BASIC will inherit a few of
the technical functions of C (like perhaps the compiler in VC) and I
suspect some aspects of Java are trickling in too.

Hasn't it already? Prototyping is currently the hottest direction
today and people familiar with it see it employed in .NET languages
and more so in coming MS coming work. There is no doubt Anders is
incorporated Javascript prototyping ideas into future .NET plans, but
also with a more declarative approach as well.

The most successful
language is the one that seems most familiar to everyone. In time, every
programming language you've ever heard of will be killed off by the NLP
(Natural Language Processor). A proper NLP will eliminate the coding
step and allow compilation to proceed directly from the specification.
Fluency in English will one day pay very well because advanced NLP
compilers will eventually be capable of modeling and compiling a working
prototype directly from the work breakdown.

Why didn't Prolog take off? NLP has its place. Why just english? I
would think globalization will raise a barrier higher toward this long
time endeavor. IMO, symbolic languages will probably get more play.
Component engineering is a model of this, components becoming symbols
that have a "Snapping" (key/receptor) property to it.

Do you think
the person who solves all the conundrums necessary to invent the NLP
would want to write it in an interpreted language?

NLP implies dynamic "automatron" accumulation and generation of
knowledge old and new combined with query dissemination techniques.
It may use fuzzy logic, neuron networks. In general, such systems
required KB Engineers and/or Experts engineers to establish the core
and spark to get the engine running.

Its really a whole different set of applications.

Whether the
code is interpreted or compiled could spell the difference between
comfortable use and product unmerchantability.

Sure, it all depends. A big direction in the application server market
is to offer embedded programming methods, i.e. server-side scripting,
using JIT and/or p-code. ASPX is, but not exclusive, example of that.
Our own application server product has "net programming" as its name
sake "Wildcat! Interactive Net server" with multi-language API, p-code
compilers, JIT dynamic programming, interpreted scripting components
of the framework. But it took a compiler to create it.

When programmers go independent, the first thing they look for is a
compiler in their language.

Sure to protect their asset.

Interpreters are great if you want to write in-house or open source
products.

It depends in how its applied. But sure, the point is solid.

See ya.

--

 

[Mike]

Actually, if you've taught Prolog -- as I have -- you quickly realize
that it isn't just "write down the specification and it executes." With
Prolog no less than with other languages, you have to think about how
the execution will proceed. Lots of things come out a lot more concise
in Prolog than in other languages. I hope it will go on to achieve
wider use; I think one of the key needs is more interoperability with
other languages, so that you could (for instance) code the GUI in C# and
do the computing in Prolog.

You seem to be (Prof and author) I exchanged emails with regarding bad
coding and ethical training at the earliest age about 15 years ago?
Different Michael Covington?

I agree, didn't teach it, but applied many AI languages including
Prolog for the development of Expert systems during my days at
Westinghouse. I also attributed languages like APL to mold my
thinking process understanding how many concepts work in concert and
how data is manipulated mentally. It helped me to quickly apply other
languages as well.

But AI and natural languages processing languages have a long history
and pretty much have their place. I guess in the past, overhead and
performance was a factor, so its possible they would be more
applicable today. In the area of intelligence learning,
gathering/searching, the question is when is most needed. Google would
see a common example where it might apply, but their methods is
probably finely tune for fast classification and query dissemination.
One might thing that is ideally the situation. On the other hand, you
have marketing pressures. i.e. google will yield more than what you
actually ask for, including near hits as well (you have to use he
advance searching to restrict it).

Finally, use, I think there should be more convergence of difference
languages. This is more proof of the interpretive, dynamic and JIT
direction affordable by hardware power today. MS seems to be heading
in the right direction. Whether its something most people will use,
thats probably will be answer much later.

I think everyone (most people) becomes an "expert" in its own ways,
and what they believe once as "better," easier and natural for them,
inevitably becomes redundant and changes in time for them.

So whats correct, better or good for us or everyone will probably
always be a subjective concept.

If you think about it, the method of programming today - typing a
keyboard is really prehistoric and slow. Voice-based programming
"should" the ultimate goal one would think.

- NEW FORM PLEASE
- ADD A VERTICAL SPLIT PANEL, DOCK FULL PLEASE
- ADD TREE VIEW IN LEFT SIDE
- ADD REPORT VIEW IN RIGHT SIDE
- SAVE AS STANDARD TREE & REPORT SPLIT VIEW FORM

The next time, you can just say:

- NEW STANDARD TREE & REPORT SPLIT VIEW FORM

However, I think voice based designs have a degrading factor, probably
in the area of recall. Will you recall the saved phrase to voice it
out over time? I guess the system will incorporate a solution,

- Show me all forms.

Just consider how voice based technical support are getting better and
better in steering callers to a final resolution or point where it
needs to transfer to a human.

Then again, I find that annoying today, and TALK programming can be
deemed annoying by co-workers. For night owls working at home, the
sleeping wife might throw her cell phone at you. "SHUT UP! YOU ARE
GOING TO WAKE UP LITTLE BILL!"

So maybe the final evolution is Thought Programing

--

 

[Jai Singh]

This is sort of an add in to all of the replies in this sub-thread.

First a question to Ben... which managed features does C# provide for
accessing hWnds, message pumps, etc., that VB.NET does not currently support?
Or, are these really benefits provided by inline unmanaged code? (thnx in
advance if you are still following this post)

In regards to all the referencing of image processing C and PeekMessage... I
agree that VB programmers (VB6 and VB.NET) that do not have a firm grasp of
Win32 app dev in C will essentially make less than optimal decisions in many
situations (but the same is true for C# programmers). And, by defending VB,
I am in no way saying that VB, historically, was "powerful" in the sense that
it could handle games, graphics, or scientific programming. I only meant
that VB was, historically, "powerful", because of what it did for the
programmer behind the scenes. And, really, message pump mis-handling in VB6,
especially via DoEvents, led to a lot of problems with no apparent,
straightforward, easy answers.

But, before digressing further my point is simply... in todays world many C#
programmers are not historical Win32 / C programmers and thus are essentially
VB programmers with {} wrapped around their heads. Yet, there is a lot of
posturing by these programmers in the lowly world of the 'business
programmer' - where they believe that the utilization of 'C' within "C#"
allocates them to some lower level / higher order memory register.

And, in my limited experience, many, many VC++ programmers that I have run
into are less than expert in the complexity within which they work. It takes
so long to become proficient in VC++ or C / Win32 programming that many are
lost in the details as they struggle to keep up with the ever changing world
around them.

Thanks for posting!

 

[vanderghast]

(...)

Yet, to interject, C# is nothing but VB (in spirit and form (pun
intended)).
It took the spirit and purpose of VB and wrapped it in {}. That's all.

(...)


Missing an important point, imho: the memory management is not the same.
The framework makes memory management trivial, stupid. Before it, only VB6
was trivial with COM (who want write COM with C++? ) but even in VB6, the
COM reference count is not without problem.

C# is far more than just not a matter of adding curly to VB6!


Vanderghast, Access MVP

 

[vanderghast]

One other thought... Something that worked against Prolog is that in the
late 1980s and 1990s, there was a movement to do everything in one
programming language (first C++, then Java) and kill off all the other
languages. Prolog got no respect simply because it wasn't a dialect of C.
Maybe F# will catch on and will raise people's consciousness about
alternative programming methodologies.

Maybe, maybe not. If I compare Prolog to SQL, both are about what we want
rather than how to get it, right? but SQL is still quite alive and well,
even got it nobility recognition by being copied (such as for LINQ).


Vanderghast, Access MVP

 

[Mike]

Michael Covington wrote:

That's me. Michael Covington of "Natural Language Processing for Prolog
Programmers" and other books.

Very cool!

Well, I don't know about that. A good typist can do 75-100 words per
minute, which is comparable to the speed of speech (100-180 wpm). The
keyboard is likely to be a lot more concise in many ways.

Interesting. Didn't know the correlation. I think people who grew up
type writers, teletypes machines, punch cards, etc, are fast typist
and possible "power" software programmers. Yes, I can see the more
concise "output" although of recent, my keyboard replacement
selections have been sucking and maybe a little of aging and dyslexia
is kicking in.

If only you can get them to THINK!

Right! which brings me to a surprising twist of a society axiom I
recently saw which I will further twist and apply here:

Give a man an answer, and he will solve his
problem for that day.

Teach a man how to think and find his own solutions,
and we will lose a great business opportunity!

<g>

 

[Mike]

One other thought... Something that worked against Prolog is that in the
late 1980s and 1990s, there was a movement to do everything in one
programming language (first C++, then Java) and kill off all the other
languages. Prolog got no respect simply because it wasn't a dialect of
C. Maybe F# will catch on and will raise people's consciousness about
alternative programming methodologies.

Thats a very good point. In fact, if I recall, there was a movement to
have one OS - Pink? Or something else? Brain is fading. But
that was the promise of the then big people in control, IBM,
Microsoft, Sun and others who have a sake in all this. It never
really materialized.

The axiom I stated in the last post applies. The socialist method (a
monopoly is really a form of socialism) only benefits one capitalist.

So having different ways of doing the same things, some easier than
others, some more powerful than others, etc, with a never-ending
expansion capability allows for more businesses and competition to exist.

I recall in a PDC I attended a while back, arriving tired to the hotel
in Seattle, getting to my room, turning on the TV where there was a
local news channel interviewing Bill Gates about the important PDC
starting the next day. When asked, "How do you keep with your
competitors?", he surprisingly said:

"Change the standards every two years."

It shocked the crap out of me! Of course, he was thinking of then #1
competitor Borland (before he get a record breaking multi-million
signing bonus to steal Anders from Borland), including every MS
developer and business who to depend on Microsoft and could never keep
up with them.

In other words, there is less profits in a stable technology, market
place and it helps competitors to keep them 1 or 2 steps behind always
trying to keep up.

Got to admire Bill Gates. Ray Ozzie? I am not too thrill about him.

--

 

[Jai Singh]

I did not mean to imply that C# was VB 6 with some sugary syntax overtop.
By 'spirit' I was trying to convey that, in a broad, general sense, C# and
the .NET framework in general, adopted the sort of RAD, abstracted, IDE
approach that VB 6 made so ubiquitous.

 

[Bill McCormick]

I did not mean to imply that C# was VB 6 with some sugary syntax overtop.
By 'spirit' I was trying to convey that, in a broad, general sense, C# and
the .NET framework in general, adopted the sort of RAD, abstracted, IDE
approach that VB 6 made so ubiquitous.

I'd say C# and VB.NET are more like Delphi than VB6. Don't they also share a
common developer?

 

[Jai Singh]

I agree and it only furthers my point. Either way... C# is much closer to
those platforms, in a sense, than to C.

 

[Lloyd Sheen]

Try :
http://blogs.msdn.com/vbteam/archiv...c-by-anders-hejlsberg-and-jonathan-aneja.aspx

And the article you talked about is 2 years old...

I doubt it will shorten this thread but at least you'll be able to make
your own mind...

This is from the horses mouth, not a bunch of conjecture. Perhaps the truth
will put this to rest.

http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=htt...1866969b89&h=9854d3d78e589b6153631e6b2ddd5324

http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=htt...hall-Meet/&h=9854d3d78e589b6153631e6b2ddd5324

Sorry if is from Facebook but there is a group in Facebook devoted to VB.NET
hosted by those who should know what is really happening with VB.

LS

 

[mayayana]

That's a good one. A person wants to know
whether they should continue investing time
in VB.Net, and the two "most dependable"
answers are a Microsoft marketing video and
a signup-required Facebook chat.

 

[Timothy Casey]

If English were the ideal language for expressing technical concepts,
there would be no formulas or diagrams in engineering books.
Human languages are not designed for expressing algorithms and data
structures precisely and concisely.
I do NLP research for a living. This is not what it's good for.

That depends on specification. I too have an NLP research program, which I
started several years ago. What I am working on will eventually be
adaptable to turning specifications into code - unless the specifications
are incomplete, vague, or misleading (which renders the specification a
meagre pretence).

 

[Timothy Casey]

I found this: http://du2.in/VBDead
It means that C# will completely replace Visual Basic. What dou you think
about this, is VB dead?

Latin is dead. So are Simula 67 and GML!

VB is very much in use. Many happy users and possibly many unhappy users.
Either way, VB is very much alive, kicking, screaming, and disemboweling the
incautious.

People who opine that VB is a dead language either fail to understand the
role of usage as a determiner of language or they are a little out of touch
with the real world, or both.

VB can be used to produce applications that work. Period. So, whether you
'should' invest in VB all boils down to what *you* need from a programming
language. If you need employment as a coder, the more languages you acquire
the more customers can include you in their project development teams, and
the more contracts you can choose from. If you need to write an antivirus
application, neither VB nor C, nor any language other than Assembler or raw
machine code are up to the task. If you need to write ASP and SaaS then
VB.NET is also accompanied by VC and a bevy of other visualised language
interfaces, so the choice is yours. If you need to put a desktop app onto a
286 VB4 does an admirable job, although any C or Basic compiler should do
the trick with a little more work, but neither VB5, VB6, VB.NET, VB2005, or
VB2008 are capable. If it's desktop applications for modern PCs, then VB6
works securely for shareware vendors, while VB .NET has a fantastic IDE &
CASE. Once again, there are always plenty of other programming languages to
choose from.

The big question has always been whether the language suits *you*.
The best way to find out is to try it and see.

Good luck...

 

[Sanders Kaufman]

That's a good one. A person wants to know
whether they should continue investing time
in VB.Net, and the two "most dependable"
answers are a Microsoft marketing video and
a signup-required Facebook chat.

It's a very effective spam strategy.
Post something like "is vb dead" or "Why Abortion is Good" - and you can
harvest a bunch of ID's from the responses.

 

[Mike]

It's a very effective spam strategy.
Post something like "is vb dead" or "Why Abortion is Good" - and you can
harvest a bunch of ID's from the responses.

It only works against people who use their (or a real) email address here.

Look at mime! <g>

--