Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Visual Basic is (supposedly) better than C#

simple-talk.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 51 posts

Re: Why Visual Basic is (supposedly) better than C#

#31

Post by UnoriginalGuy »

rohansingh wrote: post #20

Sigh. I'll actually do the job of debunking these one by one. 1. Almost every mainstream language has case-sensitivity. This avoids ambiguity by having only one right way to express a given variable. Since Visual Studio has excellent autocomplete, you don't have to repeatedly use SHIFT, and you are unlikely to accidentally mistype the variable name. Of course, when I see an argument like, "When you accidentally leave…

The tone you've decided to take is rather unfortunate. In fact many of your counter-points seem to essentially be "well he is just a stupid-head!"

You spend more time attacking the author than actually addressing his points. Which is just a shame. In fact most of your list is just a different attack against the author.

I actually prefer C# (and was a long term VB 6.0 user). But even with that being as it is, I still don't feel your post comes at this in a constructive way.

Re: Why Visual Basic is (supposedly) better than C#

#32

Post by ximeng »

masklinn wrote: post #28
rohansingh wrote: post #20

Sigh. I'll actually do the job of debunking these one by one. 1. Almost every mainstream language has case-sensitivity. This avoids ambiguity by having only one right way to express a given variable. Since Visual Studio has excellent autocomplete, you don't have to repeatedly use SHIFT, and you are unlikely to accidentally mistype the variable name. Of course, when I see an argument like, "When you accidentally leave…

> The author then continues to say that the comparison symbols in C# are "stupid" compared to Basic's "And", "Or", etc. This argument almost doesn't deserve to be addressed It does. I'm pretty sure VB's "And" and "Or" don't short-circuit… > 8. The author complains that the type for a variable declaration precedes the variable name in C#. Somehow this is a major problem. Obviously just scraping the bottom of the barre…

AndAlso and OrElse are the short-circuiting equivalents.

Re: Why Visual Basic is (supposedly) better than C#

#33

Post by shawndumas »

masklinn wrote: post #28
rohansingh wrote: post #20

Sigh. I'll actually do the job of debunking these one by one. 1. Almost every mainstream language has case-sensitivity. This avoids ambiguity by having only one right way to express a given variable. Since Visual Studio has excellent autocomplete, you don't have to repeatedly use SHIFT, and you are unlikely to accidentally mistype the variable name. Of course, when I see an argument like, "When you accidentally leave…

> The author then continues to say that the comparison symbols in C# are "stupid" compared to Basic's "And", "Or", etc. This argument almost doesn't deserve to be addressed It does. I'm pretty sure VB's "And" and "Or" don't short-circuit… > 8. The author complains that the type for a variable declaration precedes the variable name in C#. Somehow this is a major problem. Obviously just scraping the bottom of the barre…

You are correct; 'And' and 'Or' do not short circuit. You have to use 'AndAlso' and 'OrElse' if you want short circuiting.

Re: Why Visual Basic is (supposedly) better than C#

#34

Post by felipebueno »

Not sure if the article is a joke or sarcasm or something but the author makes some good points. I use VB.NET in my daily job and Python for my side projects. I like both (but Python is definitely my favorite language) and I like it because it is really simple to read and to write. I know some C like languages too and use it a lot (Javascript) but that curly-braces and semi-columns thing feels just annoying to me.

Re: Why Visual Basic is (supposedly) better than C#

#35

Post by emn13 »

jeremysmyth wrote: post #11

For those who aren't sure if it's satire or not (90% of other comments as I write this), I'll give you a clue: Andy ‘Wise Owl’ Brown decided to write a tongue-in-cheek rant whilst he could still remember the pain-points (it's in the very first sentence )

It's not very good satire. Some of the points are potentially real; it's not clear why they wouldn't matter. When you label something "No offense intendend" and proceed to make offensive statements, your preface isn't helping. Prefacing something with small-font "this is toungue-in-cheek" and proceeding to mix potentially real issues with non-issues a novice isn't helpful. I don't see how spouting irrelevant nonsense is satirical in any case. Maybe it's funny? AndAlso vs. &&; haha? If so, I don't get it. Instead it comes across as someone who really was annoyed, knew it wasn't for rational reasons, and thought head off criticisms this way.

Whatever. Why is this on HN?

Re: Why Visual Basic is (supposedly) better than C#

#36

Post by laumars »

wilhil wrote: post #24

I used VB for many years and didn't understand why the C# people mocked it... then, about 3-4 years ago I switched and have not looked back. In my honest opinion, whilst VB is obviously fully supported, C# just "feels" more professional... When you get your head around the syntax, you can seamlessly move between C#/Javascript and many other languages that all follow similar syntax without even thinking. In addition,…

Learning C# to make switching to Javascript easy seems somewhat backwards.

Plus it's not as if it's hard to leap between C-syntax and VB's syntax anyway. They're both imperative languages with much of the same core blocks (albeit often called differently). Switching between such languages shouldn't take more than a quick glance through a "beginners guide" and then some cross-referencing as you go alone (like using an English/French dictionary). It's not like they're different paradigms like functional languages (Lisp et al)

Re: Why Visual Basic is (supposedly) better than C#

#38

Post by laumars »

afshinmeh wrote: post #9

You said `&&` is a stupid symbol and `and` is a better one, right? Sorry I think you're wrong because it's a symbol that used in almost all programming languages include c, c++, JavaScript and...

> ['&&' is used] in almost all programming languages [including] c, c++, JavaScript and...

You mean all C-syntax languages. ;)

There's a hell of a lot of Turing complete languages that don't follow C's syntax (Python, Pascal, Lisp, Haskall, Scala, Erlang, Scheme, PL/SQL, JCL, COBOL, Logo, ALGOL, Fortran, Ada...and countless others which I've I've forgotten about or have never even heard of.

But sadly it seems many developers aren't even aware of the popular paradigms outside of imperative programming, let alone the numerous other imperative languages that were popular before C's syntax became the de facto standard template.

Re: Why Visual Basic is (supposedly) better than C#

#39

Post by rohansingh »

UnoriginalGuy wrote: post #31
rohansingh wrote: post #20

Sigh. I'll actually do the job of debunking these one by one. 1. Almost every mainstream language has case-sensitivity. This avoids ambiguity by having only one right way to express a given variable. Since Visual Studio has excellent autocomplete, you don't have to repeatedly use SHIFT, and you are unlikely to accidentally mistype the variable name. Of course, when I see an argument like, "When you accidentally leave…

The tone you've decided to take is rather unfortunate. In fact many of your counter-points seem to essentially be "well he is just a stupid-head!" You spend more time attacking the author than actually addressing his points. Which is just a shame. In fact most of your list is just a different attack against the author. I actually prefer C# (and was a long term VB 6.0 user). But even with that being as it is, I still…

You're right, I was a bit short in some cases. But really, it is aggravating to have to explain why PMT() should not be a builtin in the global namespace.

Re: Why Visual Basic is (supposedly) better than C#

#40

Post by TheAnimus »

anton_gogolev wrote: post #2

Oh what a piece of BS. Yet another shallow, mechanical comparison of tiny "features" and IDE peculiarities with no other purpose in life other than initiating a decade-old flamewar. And comparing "&&" and "and"? Really?

I only realised the article was a joke when he was suggesting that & is a more obvious, friendly, string concatination operator than +.
Post reply on HN