Running the same exes on the slower PC I get
VB6 563
VB2005 953
Faster PC runnign XP Pro SP3
Slower one running XP MCE SP2
Printable View
Running the same exes on the slower PC I get
VB6 563
VB2005 953
Faster PC runnign XP Pro SP3
Slower one running XP MCE SP2
Is that with Gremmy's code from post 284?Quote:
Originally Posted by WillAtwell
Yes and yours from 279Quote:
Originally Posted by WizBang
One small change made to Gremmy's code which may or may not be having an effect. The GetTickCount was not recognized in the designer and I changed it to Environment.TickCount.
Well, not knowing .net I can only guess there's some sort of "include" or something, so it would recognize the API call.
I did not see a gettickcount in the help index either nor any include in the code so I do nto know but since it is not inside the loop I would not think it made a noticable difference in the execution speed.
One other thing I just tested with very interesting results.
I moved the call to drawstuff in the dot net version to the form click event so I could repeat the test several times and get an average speed.
When executed this way I noticed that the VB6 exe varied between 15-23% processor usage and was hitting both cores of the cpu [as shown in task manager] Dot Net also hitting both cores at a load of 16-35%.
The interesting part was memory usage.
VB6 2.9 megs and held pretty steady no matter how many times I clicked the form.
Dot net 2008 build. started at 9 megs and increased by 7 megs with every click of the form. after a few clicks it had allocated over 120 megs of ram where the VB6 exe was still using under 3.
End result, the VB6 program was faster, used less resources and appeared as though it would be stable over time where as the dot net exe was slower, used more resources and gave the appearance that an out of memory error would occur if you allowed it to run long enough.
Wow, I knew .net would use more, but didn't expect so much, nor the compounding usage.
Not what I'd expect, unless you did nothing to destroy memory, and used NEW incorrectly.
I'd expect the Net version to get quicker after the first time thru.
Any idea if the garbage collection only occurs upon thread termination?Quote:
Originally Posted by dglienna
Just a simpleQuote:
Originally Posted by WizBang
Yes shoot me .. i should be using Pinvoke ... ;)Code:Private Declare Function GetTickCount Lib "kernel32" () As Long
Okay i think i may have sorted that out...Quote:
Originally Posted by WizBang
Adding this to the end of the code does a full cleanup, most of the memory was been used up by Me.BackgroundImage = New Bitmap(BmapBuffer).Code:c.Dispose()
If Not Me.BackgroundImage Is Nothing Then
Me.BackgroundImage.Dispose()
End If
Me.BackgroundImage = New Bitmap(BmapBuffer)
BufferGObj.Dispose()
BmapBuffer.Dispose()
That seemed to help, only adding 4 megs per click now was 7 beforeQuote:
Originally Posted by GremlinSA
I added the declare to the form and put back the gettickcount but it errored on the t=gettickcount with the message make sure you are not dividing by 0. :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by GremlinSA
Post the code that you are using.
Oops my bad.Quote:
Originally Posted by WillAtwell
I missed removing one line and added the code after the new bitmap.
After I removed that first line above it would vary between 14 and 17 megs being allocated. While that is still 4-5 times what vb6 used at least it appears stable now.Code:Me.BackgroundImage = New Bitmap(BmapBuffer)
c.Dispose()
If Not Me.BackgroundImage Is Nothing Then
Me.BackgroundImage.Dispose()
End If
BufferGObj.Dispose()
BmapBuffer.Dispose()
This is what I had on the last run
Code:Public Class Form1
'Private Declare Function GetTickCount Lib "kernel32" () As Long
Private Sub Form1_Click(ByVal sender As Object, ByVal e As System.EventArgs) Handles Me.Click
DrawStuff()
End Sub
Private Sub Form1_Load(ByVal sender As System.Object, ByVal e As System.EventArgs) Handles MyBase.Load
TextBox1.Text = 3
DrawStuff()
End Sub
Private Sub DrawStuff()
Dim Rct As Rectangle, W As Integer, H As Integer
Dim I As Integer, J As Integer, X1 As Integer, Y1 As Integer
Dim X2 As Integer, Y2 As Integer
Dim BmapBuffer As Image
Dim BufferGObj As Graphics
Dim T As Integer
T = Environment.TickCount
Rct.Size = Me.ClientSize
W = Rct.Width
H = Rct.Height
BmapBuffer = New Bitmap(W, H)
BufferGObj = Graphics.FromImage(BmapBuffer)
BufferGObj.Clear(Color.FromArgb(&H60, &H60, &H60))
Dim c As New Pen(Color.White)
J = CInt(TextBox1.Text)
If J < 1 Then J = 1
X2 = J
Y2 = J * 1.4
For X1 = 0 To W Step X2
For Y1 = 0 To H Step X2
'For I = 0 To J
c.Color = Color.FromArgb(X1 Mod 256, Y1 Mod 256, (X1 + Y1) Mod 256)
BufferGObj.DrawRectangle(c, X1, Y1, Y2 - 1, Y2 - 1)
'Next
Next
Next
Me.Text = Environment.TickCount - T
'Me.BackgroundImage = New Bitmap(BmapBuffer)
c.Dispose()
If Not Me.BackgroundImage Is Nothing Then
Me.BackgroundImage.Dispose()
End If
Me.BackgroundImage = New Bitmap(BmapBuffer)
BufferGObj.Dispose()
BmapBuffer.Dispose()
End Sub
End Class
Strange..Quote:
Originally Posted by WillAtwell
On my system it starts at 3.5 megs, jumps to 7.2 after first click (First bitmap created..
then every click there after climbs to 10.8, and drops back to 7.2 after the pass is finished...
This is with it running at full screen ...
The smaller the form the lower the memory usage..
I have been late to pop up here. But I have read almost around 70% posts in this thread. It is different fact that I understood only around 50% of what I read, but, just as some one said, again my 2c on it.
I personally have done some programming with VB6, a lot more programming with VC 6 and higher and now using all of the languages in VS 2005 and .NET framework 2.0. Yet, I through all these posts (out of the ones I read), I have never come across a single post mentioning the biggest short-comings of the VB 6, which happens to be the lack of true object-oriented features such as inheritance, polymorphism and code-reusability. Even people in VB6 circles have admitted that and I don't see why anyone should deny that. That was one major advantage that VC 6 had over VB 6. But, VC 6 came with its own set of problems, as TheCPUWizard would mention time and again regarding its non-compliance to standards. One of the issues with this fact was that a lot of code would be repeated in VB 6.
VB.NET, according to me, is a lot more improved language in terms of providing these features. Speaking about the IDE, the user has excellent features like Code-snippet manager, project and item templates, addins in VS 2005, which I think any user should take advantage of and I would leave the readers to comment upon them. I may look to go off the hook here, but trust me, I am not. As it has been mentioned, time is the major consideration these days to justify the projects and these tools along with many others help in expediting the process.
Another, important point to discuss here is the way of building the applications. VB6 used an interpreter (??) where as VB.NET uses a strong MSIL compiler. As any CS student would know that compiled programs run better than interpreted ones. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Also, there was a lot of fuzz about reverse engineering earlier on. Also there was a mention of Obfuscation techniques. I would like to add to it, saying that .NET applications can be secured using Dotfuscator. According to my knowledge, all it does is, creates its own MSIL, which is not the actual MSIL that would be generated by .NET framework (or Ngen.exe). I forgot the exact workings, but I think other folks who might have used it might add to it. Also, I have been listening to some professionals debating the use of Dotfuscator, and I would like to know the reason for that as well.
I personally feel that, C++ has been sidelined by MS. A lot of third party support has been developed and is still being developed for C++ outside MS circles and that is good too. But not in MS circles. And very truly it is a pity, for a person who has to work with MS, and has developed skills in a language as difficult as C++, has to be left behind just because MS does not provide the best of support to its most powerful language. A lot of features that are available in C# and VB.NET available today are not available to C++ application developers. So even if some one experienced in C++ has to work with .NET framework and knows the managed coding syntax very well, is looking forward to learn C#. So, all that learning curve and efforts were futile and makes you feel stupid. Outside MS environment, there is a steady support going on for C++ and it will be there. I personally think that C++ compilers have greatly evolved. And there are really smart compilers outside MS circles and waiting to be used. MS's strong presence and marketing for their products overshadows these, but a real programmer in need of a real compiler would certainly go for them.
Having said that, I also personally like C# as well as VB.NET very much. If you know classic VB and C++, then I think anyone should not have any problems in grasping either of these. To add to it, the namespaces, classes, properties, methods, etc., being provided by the .NET framework remain the same irrespective of the language. My only lament is that MS is not giving same sort of support to C++/CLI as it is giving it to C# and VB.NET. If only, it had concentrated on managed C++ and developed the kind of support and automation they have for C# and VB.NET, I would have liked to stick with C++.
Regards,
Bhushan.
I had an oversight adding the last piece of code. It is cleanign up now but using more memory on mine that what you are seeing.Quote:
Originally Posted by GremlinSA
On my system it is running at 14,332K and going to 17,968 then back to 14,344 most of the time, sometimes it is a little higher but goes back to the 14,344 after a click or two.
What res are you running in full screen? I am using 1280x768 32
rather take the DrawStuff call out of here, then you see how much memory is used for the bitmapping..Code:Private Sub Form1_Load(ByVal sender As System.Object, ByVal e As System.EventArgs) Handles MyBase.Load
TextBox1.Text = 3
DrawStuff()
End Sub
Also looking over the memory usage for VB6 and .NET i've come across something interesting.. In VB6 the image is not stored in the applications memory, but rather either on the Graphics card, the Windows Graphics buffer or in the GDI itself. After 1 pass, if you minimise the form, then restore it, the image is lost.. There is no buffered image to restore from ..
However in the .NET , we rendering and storing the bitmap in our applications memory, Form.BackgroundImage.. this also gives us a buffer for when the form is minimised and restored..
This i think is where the larger memory useage for .net is comming from ...
Also something to think about, .NET's form object has alot of extra property's and objects.. these will inadvertantly increase the forms memory footprint.
The same res, on a HP 530 Notebook with 2G ram, 1.8Ghz Intel Duo coreQuote:
Originally Posted by WillAtwell
On Vista Enterpise..
Did you LOOK at the difference in the code that I posted???Quote:
Originally Posted by WizBang
MOD
ANDCode:
Dim red As Integer = X1 Mod 256
00000118 mov edx,ebx
0000011a and edx,800000FFh
00000120 jns 0000012A
00000122 dec edx
00000123 or edx,0FFFFFF00h
00000129 inc edx
The maintenance of the sig, changes it from 2 instructions to 6 instructions. For Positive numbers only 3 get executed, but the jump still takes time, and impacts the Pentium pre-fecth pipeline.Code:Dim red As Integer = (X1 And 255)
00000114 mov edx,ebx
00000116 and edx,0FFh
At a fullscreen I get 30ms improvement (~ 3%) in .NET. This is quite significunt in this case, because it's been called 3 times per color setting. and makes up a big part of our inner loop.Quote:
Originally Posted by WizBang
I've not tested on the VB6 code, but plan to soon..(I'm in bed, almost ready for sleep, online via the laptop, and VB6 is on my Desktop system)...
Yeah, well Gremmy was right - I was in desperate need of sleep.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheCPUWizard
Me thinks that has been happening to all of us...Way too often....Quote:
Originally Posted by WizBang
You'd have more time to sleep if you would code in a newer framework. ;) :DQuote:
Originally Posted by WizBang
The only reason I'm in this business is because I enjoy it. Sleeping is a lesser priority.
There's time to sleep when you (or you're computer) is dead!Quote:
Originally Posted by WizBang
Wait! You mean they don't have computers on the other side? :eek:
Just the ghosts of computers...all the leaked memory builds up on the other side as an evil spirit.Quote:
Originally Posted by WizBang
that'd be dll hell i guess? :)
Then i want to stay..... ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by WizBang
Vb6 only uses the interpreter while running in p-code. once you compile that to native code, you only have the runtime dlls.Quote:
Originally Posted by bhushan1980
I like c++ and will continue to use it until they make a superset over c++ or whatever they have in mind. Microsoft is in one way over shadowing c++, but they won't put it in the dark all the way because people depend on it.Quote:
Originally Posted by bhushan1980
Although I can't say I don't like the language, I can say I don't like the .net part that goes with it :)Quote:
Originally Posted by bhushan1980
I do know both ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by bhushan1980
Good post btw
Ok back to speed issue here on the vb.net :D
Oh and I was trying out the vs 2008 express that is free since it has been mentioned.. Well screw it. I am not registering so they can spy on me, so now it is not free in my eyes
Free is when you can download it and it will run all the time... just like code::blocks.
One thing to note here is, although this thread/vote was originally meant to be the one referring to VB 6.0 and VB.NET, it pretty much covered C++, C# and few other languages as well. But, one thing which I said was the major drawback was the lack of inheritance. Syntactically, it was much more friendlier than VC++ 6.0 which made it easy to develop applications using VB 6.0 and COM made it possible to take advantage of both the languages. But many a times, C++ would have an edge over VB 6.0. I am not sure if VB 6.0 developers said anything they had equivalent to that. And infact, VB.NET provided those developers with more than what they had!.Not sure what to comment about working with .NET framework and all the slowness and reverse engineering issues...
Also, too much flexibility in syntax, sometimes baffles a person from C/C++ background. For instance, apart from the semi-colon and case-insensitivity, arrays had an option (I heard) to start their indexes at 0 or 1 using Option Base 1. According to me, things like these should not be included simply because they do not have a purpose. Agreed that they introduce flexibility, but at what cost?
Having said that, I also do not believe the argument that multiple inheritance is bad. But I sincerely believe that, only those people who are really good at it and who are confident that they are at an advantage using it, should use it. I have seen some really brilliant code with it. I think some people here would agree with me. Of course, a great deal of care must be taken while dealing with those. But I sometimes feel that the sheer analytical power of some of the brilliant minds and their urge to do things is curbed by circulating the notion that MI is bad. Even if anyone asks me today in an interview or forum or a talent talk or anything, I would have to say that it is not good unless there is a scope for a detailed explanation.
What I feel is...if given a chance, I would prefer sticking with C++ and would love to improve on my coding skills. But looking in the direction where MS is going, I do not see any special development or promotion of C++ as their main language. Also, if you prefer to stick to C++, how long are you going to be in market? No doubt that it will prevail outside MS environment.Quote:
I like c++ and will continue to use it until they make a superset over c++ or whatever they have in mind. Microsoft is in one way over shadowing c++, but they won't put it in the dark all the way because people depend on it.
On the other hand, there are some libraries outside MS, that are trying to include many things supporting C++. One such example is the wt (web toolkit) that uses C++ with Boost libraries for web development. There is an article by Victor Volkman on CG at
I found it very interesting. But having said that, it is not complete and no way near .NET framework it seems. But, I would have certainly appreciated if MS had developed something like along with C# and VB.NET for C++ as well.
I do like .NET as well. And the reason is understandably true. Where the world is going, MS has to go with it to stay in the race. At the same time it has its own set of constraints to work with. So what if .NET is a framework that comes with windows OS. They had to take advantage of the existing architecture. It is there in market to compete in web development. But that does not mean, ignoring what once was their strength. I remember, MFC was a huge hit back in '98. And still it is being used. But, it came with obvious short comings then; not to mention the non ISO compliance of the language it came with. Now, it is still there but only as one of the many alternatives out there. If MS decides, it could still develop the same kind of support for C++ as well. However, I think it is a little too late and too expensive as well to do it. In my opinion, C++ is fast diminishing at least in MS circles. I do not know where it is going to lead the development to.Quote:
Although I can't say I don't like the language, I can say I don't like the .net part that goes with it
Of course that is what feel. Others might have different thoughts...
Regards,
Bhushan.
I understand your points on staying current with microsoft, but if I did that, opengl would be dead and microsoft would have all my money and I would be using vista :cry:. The only reason opengl still exist for microsoft is because people had to stick up for what they wanted. If I went with you to the .net, I would be a hyprocrite. I don't want c++ nor opengl to fade away. C++ is used for games. No other language can do this effectively as asm, c or c++.
To me vb6 was fine with modules. vb6 didn't really need inheritance. Modules worked well enough. It has been sometime, but I am sure you could use modules within modules if inheritance was an issue. To me vb6 didn't have problems with duplicate code. vb6 is pretty old now, but even at its age, it stands up very good.
Even if I can't work on microsft os, that doesn't mean the end of the world. I have been telling other people to learn more than one language for a reason. Also it does give you a great deal on how languages work on computers and how they are built.
I would repeat the .net issues, but they have been posted over and over by now. I will repeat that vista is terrible, so I am glad I don't stay current with microsoft. I will wait until the next version of windows to come out and hope they didn't screw that one up :(
Joeman, maybe one day you can explain why you dislike Microsoft so much?
I like microsoft and yet I don't like microsoft. Go figure. It has pros and cons. I suppose I stress cons before pros ;)
Fine one pro about microsoft. They make their os easy to use :D
one con about microsoft = money
I thought I said I like vb6? Isn't that microsoft's work :) I just don't like the .net and how much they are a monopoly.
Vista isn't that great one know for an update :thumbd:
Similar to Joeman, I like as well as dis-like MS...but I admit that I might be wrong as well in some points I am making here. But there is fair amount of truth here:
I like MS only for the obvious reasons. When I started learning C++, I pretty much did iostream programming as any one and every one would do. Also, I did quite a bit of PASCAL and C. And after that, I did some BASIC language programming. It made me clear with syntax. Although, MS has nothing to do with these languages, I liked it because, it made it so easy for me to understand how these languages can help you develop any kind of application. For instance, VB 6 utilized a syntax similar to that of BASIC language (and of course much more than that) but it gave us the ability to develop a variety of different applications with windows. Take the example of Visual C++. Before Visual C++, I was using the compiler for iostream, but never really knew what the other options were for. Then in one vacation during my schooling, I just decided to browse through some books with Visual C++ and MFC programming. I just could not believe that what ever I was doing until then with C++, was just a part of it. However, wrongly done Visual C++ 6.0 and previous versions might be, it was a hot technology then, simply because it was a first huge step in putting so much support to a language as difficult as C++. Whatever C++ I understand today, I owe it to Microsoft. Because, then on I explored a lot of different areas and environments (compilers) for C++. There are quite a few. I also read through few chapters in Wrox's Industrial C++ and then I knew that there are more efficient ways to do programming. Then over the years, Visual C++ became more standardized and Visual C++ became fully compliant with ISO standards. When I read about that, and after a number of posts from TheCPUWizard telling people to stop using VC++ 6.0 and switch to Visual C++ 2005 or higher. At the sametime, I support MS for giving its extensive frameworks i.e., .NET 1.0/1.1/2.0/3.0/3.5 and C# and VB.NET. And of course MSDN after the enhancements. And there are few more I missed. However, till here....I support MS all along
But in recent years, there has been more onus on decoration, rather than real development stuff. As I said before, MS has done well in past and is doing well even today. I posted a bug on MS forums, regarding adding C++ code snippets in VS studio 2005 IDE. I think no one replied there! I wrongly posted the report on some forums. But then I correctly utilized my time and posted the bug report correctly. I do not know if anyone even looked at it! Early on, I kept checking, but after a while I stopped. I just wanted the confirmation if it was a bug, or it was not a feature or there was a limitation or they never said that it could be done or it had a fix already. But it never did happen. Let us forget that, I also posted a bug in C# section, I did not get a reply for that either. I know I might be wrong here. But should it be so difficult to just reply to a bug posted? If I missed anything such as a reference to the bug report and all, I do not know. But I personally checked it for a few days for the replies. Actually never did happen. May be it was not a bug! But, at least I would never know. I won't repost the kind of attention (or neglect) shown by MS towards C++. Even if MS does attract a few talented people working else where in C++ and ask them to develop something in C++, I think they would have the C++ developers support as well. Certainly there is a support going for C++, but not with MS. Outside MS, it will really keep on going even if it is not as booming and lurking as .NET!
Regards,
Bhushan.
Let's remember the title of this thread:
Why VB 6.0??
Yes ...I agree
The title was not very clear on its intentions which was to make people ponder why they don't use the vb.net version. It wasn't a real poll yet it was a poll to make vb6 users feel bad and make them switch to the .net
for each option, here is an answer to each one individually:Quote:
1. My employer/school requires it - and provides a valid licensed copy
2. My employer/school requires it - I dont know if I am legal
3. Been using if for years legally and see not reason to upgrade to (free) new version
4. Got a copy of it from somewhere..
5. I didn't know any better
6. I am a caveman...
1. No, nobody requires me to use it
2. I think I would know if I got it legally
3. So what the new version is free. It is still in the .net
4. I do have a disc of it
5. I do know better. Are you calling me a moron here or what?
6. No I am not a caveman. You just like insulting me?
If it wasn't to discriminate vb6 users, the poll would have looked like this:
Can you see the differences? If the poll wasn't about why people use it, perhaps he should have asked it like this....:Quote:
Why vb6??
1. Vb6 has been here and I can still use it
2. Vb6 is a good language I know how to use
3. Vb6 is compatible with almost all versions of microsoft oses
4. Vb6 is still alive and I support it
5. Vb6 isn't primitive yet
6. I just like using Vb6
Well there and I approve of this message... ;)Quote:
Why not use Vb.net:
1. The .net sucks
2. You can reverse engineer the .net's msil with a decompiler
3. It is too slow still
4. The .net is too easy a moron can take my job
5. Why bother with the .net if you don't have a fast computer
6. Vb6 just works.
7. I found out Vb6 can work under vista and probably will do so
8. 64-bit is a bit overrated still and I don't need 64-bit, so vb6 32-bit works fine
9. All the above!
Did you look at the results?
5,2,10,2,1,5
Most popular was:Ad those people learned something...Quote:
Been using if for years legally and see not reason to upgrade to (free) new version
I just meant that it was in no way concerned with C++ (which theCPUWizard also does well)
Might want to start your own poll there?
It has well been discussed that there are a more options to this poll, however all of the listed ones are valid..Quote:
Originally Posted by Joeman
1.) Many Development company's still support VB6 software, and still produce new applications in it..
2.) There are hundreds of places running illegal software, and often the people acctually working on the system are not sure if all the software is legaly licenced.. (I've got ONE Legal Copy of VB6, but ran it on several systems at one time)
3.) I was one of these people for a long while.. I downloaded VS 2005 a long time ago, but carried on with VB6, it's only the last 6 months that i've been working full time in .NET..
4.) See number 2. above... There are several people that 'get' copies from friends, Work, etc.. My first copy of VB5 is one such copy...
5.) You'd be surprised how many people don't know about VB.NET, or that it's the next gen. of VB6.
6.) (My Vote on this Poll) some of us are from Noah's Ark, and just dont like progress, We like to stick to what we know. I use .NET for work, but still do my personal little app's in VB6 ...
If you dont aprove of the OP polls options, start your own poll.. All the senior members here seem to aprove of the options...Quote:
Originally Posted by Joeman
The rest of us dont !!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Joeman
A new poll item:
Quote:
7. I have noticed that the VB6 jobs have dried up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GermlinSa
Quote:
Originally Posted by GermlinSa
What you and arjay don't approve of my silly approval message? lol. It was a joke ;) I got it from the darn presidental compaign. I really don't care that you use the .net. I personaly can say use the .net and leave me alone. I know my apps will run faster.Quote:
Originally Posted by GermlinSa
8. I noticed the .net sucksQuote:
Originally Posted by Arjay
9. I don't work with vb6 as a job and I am sure most don't now
10. vb.net isn't for jobbing either. C# is.... mainly
11. This was a stupid poll and i have no intentions on making another poll
12. Why are you reading this?
Perhaps someone should compile a list of known facts about each languages differences:
1. Speed.
2. Runtime requirements
3. Compiling
4. Language syntax
5. Resources
6. Garage Collection
7. Price
8. Decompiling
9. Security measurements
10. Difference from msil vs actual native pe files
11. Job in demand
12. Hobby vs Job
13. .net history
14. Bussiness vs personal computers.
15. why people don't consider the vb.net an upgrade
16. Win32 apis vs the .net api
17. Speed factor between managed and unmanaged code
18. Trade offs
Speed vs Ease
Managed vs Unmanaged code
Security vs Ease
I know thecpuwizard was generating a thread for something like this, but no one has stepped up to do such a thing. Even if it is just external links from the www. It still would be nice
If anyone is serious about why people shouldn't use vb6 and go ahead and move to vb.net should take into consideration and do what thecpuwizard had in mind
btw, vb.net isn't a good place to start in the .net.. c# is
You try both? The IDE is NOT the same. Intellisense is a lot better in VB, which means that you can learn how to use it easier.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joeman
I suppose you code in Notepad?
The list is incomplete. You missed several reasons that a .Net lover like myself uses .Net and the latest VS.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joeman
I know the ide is better for vb.net, but I was referring to job hunting. Also notepad is out of date. I use Code::Blocks. I think I already told you this somewhere else, but I pretty sure your feeble mind as lost that little information nowQuote:
Originally Posted by Dglienna
How would I know. I don't use the .net. Make it complete.Quote:
Originally Posted by Arjay
Like I said before. Microsoft made programming in the .net just like pointing and clicking on their os. I believe the reasons you like to program in the .net is because you feel you're a better programmer since you are being managed by ms. Also you can't screw up since your in the ms box now. I bet you even use vista :(... What were you thinking? Just the sounds of msil + vista doesn't suit me well
I'd be careful if i was you ... You scating on very thin ice here..Quote:
Originally Posted by Joeman
You've made your preferance known, now can you stop bashing those of us that are using .NET..
I think that you are vastly mistaken here.. We've taken that Myth and shown that pure VB.NET, runs eqivalent times if not marginally beter than VB6 with API's.. Yet you make these claims with out putting any evidence foward..Quote:
Originally Posted by Joeman
This is an insult, And alot of us here do not take kindly to others insulting our line or work..Quote:
Originally Posted by Joeman