B
response to cww
cww ; are you saying VB / VC++/VJ++ is usefull for automation or not??
i believe it is myself ; i write it all day long for my company.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Curt Wuollet"
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, May 18, 2002 8:43 PM
Subject: Re: PC: Visual Basic as a Soft Engine
> Hi Asif
>
> List Manager wrote:
> > ------------ Forwarded Message ------------
> > From: Asif Khokher
> >
> > Michael & Alex!
> >
> > You have rightly pointed out that VB is not suitable for control
> > purposes. But the question was to use VB solely and implement it in
> > Microsoft Environment. Getting the maximum from VB based solution is
> > difficult, but finding ways in low level languages i.e C, C++,
> > Assembly.... is not easy for an average programmer especially diagnosing
> > & maintenance.
>
> That depends on what you call an average programmer. I am conversant in
> all the mentioned low level languages and half a dozen (more or less)
> high level languages, but I still wouldn't bill myself as a programmer.
> It seems definitions have slipped a lot in the Microsoft era. But, as
> a general rule, if you can't properly program the task at hand, you're
> not a programmer.
>
> VB is user friendly and generation of lot of ActiveX
> > control in the markets has lead to use of VB. Windows is also striving to
> > be real time operating system, and hopefully dream of VB based soluton
> > can become reality in near future.
>
> Oh the horror!, the horror!
>
> IMHO the blight of people who think programming is running end user
> software and pointing and clicking something together is directly
> responsible for the lack of progress in PC automation. When a "Hello
> World!" program is two megabytes, it hardly qualifies as progress.
> Think of it this way, how on earth can you possibly make two pages
> of control code perform poorly on a 1Ghz machine? Code it in VB.
> I'm not sure it is possible in any other way. And that's programming?
> In any of those "low level" languages, with skill, you could run
> hundreds of instances of the same logic before slowing the machine
> much. I think we're moving backwards fast. Opinions?
<clip>
cww ; are you saying VB / VC++/VJ++ is usefull for automation or not??
i believe it is myself ; i write it all day long for my company.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Curt Wuollet"
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, May 18, 2002 8:43 PM
Subject: Re: PC: Visual Basic as a Soft Engine
> Hi Asif
>
> List Manager wrote:
> > ------------ Forwarded Message ------------
> > From: Asif Khokher
> >
> > Michael & Alex!
> >
> > You have rightly pointed out that VB is not suitable for control
> > purposes. But the question was to use VB solely and implement it in
> > Microsoft Environment. Getting the maximum from VB based solution is
> > difficult, but finding ways in low level languages i.e C, C++,
> > Assembly.... is not easy for an average programmer especially diagnosing
> > & maintenance.
>
> That depends on what you call an average programmer. I am conversant in
> all the mentioned low level languages and half a dozen (more or less)
> high level languages, but I still wouldn't bill myself as a programmer.
> It seems definitions have slipped a lot in the Microsoft era. But, as
> a general rule, if you can't properly program the task at hand, you're
> not a programmer.
>
> VB is user friendly and generation of lot of ActiveX
> > control in the markets has lead to use of VB. Windows is also striving to
> > be real time operating system, and hopefully dream of VB based soluton
> > can become reality in near future.
>
> Oh the horror!, the horror!
>
> IMHO the blight of people who think programming is running end user
> software and pointing and clicking something together is directly
> responsible for the lack of progress in PC automation. When a "Hello
> World!" program is two megabytes, it hardly qualifies as progress.
> Think of it this way, how on earth can you possibly make two pages
> of control code perform poorly on a 1Ghz machine? Code it in VB.
> I'm not sure it is possible in any other way. And that's programming?
> In any of those "low level" languages, with skill, you could run
> hundreds of instances of the same logic before slowing the machine
> much. I think we're moving backwards fast. Opinions?
<clip>