i heard that this is not good.
but I want to make very generic programs.
would Visual Basic 6 suffice ?
+11
A:
The very first reason is that Microsoft no longer offers support for VB6 development. This product is end of life.
Lex Li
2009-12-20 03:57:20
YES YES YES! Don't use VB6! This alone should suffice as the first and last reason to not use it. Throw in the relatively crummy libraries compared to .Net and the clumsier, less expressive syntax, and I can't come up with a single _good_ reason to _use_ VB6.
Greg D
2009-12-20 05:36:20
+2
A:
It worked well in its time, but it doesn't have a simple path forward. If you want to migrate to a newer version of Visual Basic, it can be a fair bit of work. And no new tools are being developed for it.
Mark Wilkins
2009-12-20 03:57:46
A:
If you are approaching the programming world, and you want to do some programs, Visual Basic is more than sufficient.
Once you learned it, you will keep to use it.
As Visual Basic Express (which is the version that was before called Visual Basic .NET) is given free from Microsoft, maybe you could be interested in that.
kiamlaluno
2009-12-20 04:01:52
Visual Basic Express editions (2005, 2008) are all for VB.NET, not for VB6.
Lex Li
2009-12-20 04:17:10
That is true. I just wanted to make clear the difference, which could not be clear to anybody.
kiamlaluno
2009-12-20 04:40:22
A:
Depending on what you mean by "Generic Programs" there are plenty of other environments/languages that you can create simple apps with, even at no cost.
Visual Basic is old and no longer supported by Microsoft, sounds like you may just have access to a copy.
Yes you certainly can create generic programs with it, but where do you go from there? Is this hobby programming?
curtisk
2009-12-20 04:02:16
+2
A:
If your major interest is in a cheap VB development environment, as previously mentioned, the Visual Studio Express editions are free from Microsoft.
I can't think of many good reasons to use VB6 instead of one of the express versions. Also as previously noted whatever VB skills you learn won't be particularly portable and the apps you build won't be able easily to migrate to more up-to-date environments.
cori
2009-12-20 04:10:11
A:
I'd say VB6 is still ok for (throw away) prototyping and probably better than VB.NET in that regard. A larger problem is the lack of true inheritance and being able to use the idioms available in .NET. As such it makes writing clean and maintainable code more difficult.
rob_g
2009-12-20 04:10:50
I disagree. WPF and VB.Net is one of the fastest prototyping tools I know of.
codekaizen
2009-12-20 04:38:08
depends what you're doing. It's easier to set up networking by dropping a winsock control on a form. I personally find VB6 faster to prototype applications than VB.NET, but my company doesn't do WPF. Although I said VB was OK to prototype with, it's not good to develop with, I guess you're disagreeing with that?
rob_g
2009-12-20 08:59:02
+1
A:
Forget VB6. It's a dead system. No support, no future. Use the Visual Basic Express Edition, as suggested above. It's free, useful, and about as "generic" as it gets anymore. Or, you could use something even better: Python (www.python.org). Or IronPython. (www.codeplex.com/IronPython). Much better system.
Dave
2009-12-20 05:30:44
A:
I will also have a look at Real Basic. It is a cross-compiler and your applications will run on different platforms. There are many options available in the market. It all depends on what your definition of "generic program" is.
Square Rig Master
2009-12-20 07:29:59