Michael Flanakin's Web Log

Comments and complaints on software and technology in general

  Home  |   Contact  |   Syndication    |   Login
  159 Posts | 18 Stories | 95 Comments | 530 Trackbacks

News

This weblog is no longer being maintained. For the latest, check out www.michaelflanakin.com!

Article Categories

Archives

Post Categories

Image Galleries

Miscellaneous

Well, I'm behind on my reading, so excuse the belated commenting... Patrick Meader, Editor in Chief of VSM, made his monthly comments in the December 2003 issue of the magazine. I couldn't let this one pass me up, though...

Patrick talks about how VB will be getting a bit of a face-lift to bring it back to what it was intended to be from day one: a developer tool for non-programmers. Of course, those weren't his words, they're mine; but, let me clue you in on some of his words:

... the next version of VB [is] intended to facilitate [the] use of the tool for what Ari [Bixhorn] calls the occupational programmer.

“Ocupational programmer,” huh? So, what do you take that as? Let's continue...

... [VB] empowered nontraditional programmers ... to create applications ...

Once again, “nontraditional programmers.” Seems to be a theme. But, my last two quotes are ones that I think are important for all VB developers to realize:

VB needed to make the transition to .NET if it was to remain a relevant programming language

...and...

... [VB] was less suited to creating scalable, n-tier, and/or Internet-enabled applications ...

Now, I do believe that VB (the language) is fully capable of supporting enterprise applications. But, technically, so can COBOL - that doesn't mean that I want to do it. VB was brought up on the idea that you don't have to be a programmer to create functional solutions. You have to applaud Microsoft for the wonderful effort put into the language and its tools, past and present. However, you have to acknowledge the fact that it was built for people who are not the average developer. This is why VB developers get so much crap. I have known (and still do) some great VB developers. I do, however, think that they should take the step beyond the RAD-centric language. VB is meant for one person: the business analyst (you'll be hearing more about this title from me later). Whether you call them business analysts, occupational or nontraditional programmers, or any other name, it's all the same: they're business people that are filling the gap due to inadequate funding for real developers. This is the essence, or soul of VB.

posted on Friday, January 23, 2004 4:52 PM

Feedback

# re: The Soul of VB 1/23/2004 6:08 PM Paul Wilson
I actually prefer C#, but I have a strong VB background, and still do some VB. I agree that VB is one of the few languages that traditionally did enable the type of business non-programmer that you are referring to, but VB has also for some time enabled "real" professional developers to build true enterprise systems, and businesses wanted their "real" developers using VB because they were often far more productive and able to create such systems far quicker than most of the alternatives at that time. Interestingly enough, its this VB-like productivity that has made C# so appealing to so many C++ developers!

# re: The Soul of VB 1/24/2004 9:23 AM Michael Flanakin
I agree. I wasn't sure if I explained myself very well in my post, but I do think that VB is sufficient for "real" development. I'm just saying that its foundation is based on enabling business analysts, not providing a platform for hardcore, code-centric development. Historically, C-based languages tend to be the most focused on this aspect.

Post Feedback

Title:
Name:
Email: (never displayed)
Url:
Comments: 
Please add 2 and 1 and type the answer here: