|
|
|
|
|
|
by cm2187
1727 days ago
|
|
|
I think VB6’s bad reputation is that it is stuck in the 90s. I don’t know if any version of a language from that time would be popular now (let’s leave FORTRAN and COBOL aside). I disagree that VB.net was dreadful. But it broke backward compatibility but I think for good reasons: arguments being byref by default in VB6, collections being inconsistently 0 based or 1 based, the SET keyword that wasn’t really serving any purpose and was inconsistently applied, having to provide parameters within brackets or between spaces depending on whether the return value is assigned to a variable or not, etc... I have a lot of sympathy for the frustration of someone who has to maintain a huge code base when backward compatibility is broken, but I think the changes VB.net introduced were necessary. |
|
|
I remember when my father had to use medicall services billing program supplies by a natinal health insurance company, and he had some problems with it.
Luckily, I was a student in Bucharest and I went to their headquarters to play middleman between my father and their "informatician".
This "informatician" was the sole architect, UX designer, developer, tester, release manager for this program -- VB6+ access.
I sort of helped him debug the code, he built me a special version and handed it to me on a CD.
The program was ok UX wise and blisteringly fast. Years later, they hired this corrupt company that built software for the State and produced a horrendous program, that took terrible and just the startup took 15 minutes (parsing hunonguous XML and inserting it line by line into a local sql database, as far as I remember reading the logs).
The contract ran into HUNDREDS or millions of euros. Granted, the scope of the program was a bit wider.