In a comment, Kent asks:
Doesn't it bother you that MS doesn't see the current state of VB.Net as a problem?
No, Kent, it doesn't bother me, because I don't see the current state of VB.NET as a problem, at least not a major one. Here's why:
Microsoft has always positioned VB as a RAD tool. By definition, RAD applications are meant to be developed rapidly. So while I agree that it would be nice if VB6 code could port effortlessly to VB.NET, I don't think the fact that it doesn't will present a huge problem to the vast majority of VB users: Most VB apps were written in a few days or weeks, and/or were written to solve very specific problems. Many of these apps can be maintained in VB6 for the remainder of their useful lives. If they do need to be rewritten, doing so will not require a great deal of effort -- they were developed rapidly to begin with, remember?
Most of the angst I see regarding the lack of compatibility between "Classic" VB and VB.NET comes from people who have used VB not as a RAD tool, but rather to develop large, complex applications. They have made a large investment in VB code, and expected to be able to collect dividends on that investment for many years. If I were in their position, I'd probably feel similarly frustrated. But I don't think their frustration equates to a major problem for the "state of VB": Their situation is an exception, rather than the rule.
Posted by Len Weaver on September 28, 2003:
Posted by Kent on October 3, 2003:
Posted by Phil Weber on October 3, 2003:
Leave a comment