Which do you prefer?

[Master Programmer]

Which do you prefer?

Classic VB example:
*************************
Private Sub Command1_Click()
MsgBox "Hello, World"
End Sub

A VB.NET example:
**************************
Private Sub Button1_Click(ByVal sender As System.Object, ByVal e As
System.EventArgs) Handles Button1.Click
MessageBox.Show("Hello, World")
End Sub

[Stephany Young]

Playing your silly game:

When I'm developing/maintaining something using VB6, I use the former.

When I'm developing/maintaining something using VB.NET, I use the latter.

"Master Programmer" <master_p...@outgun.com> wrote in message
news:1165199087.4...@j44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

[Blake]

On Dec 4, 1:24 pm, "Master Programmer" <master_program...@outgun.com>
wrote:

What do you prefer?

Classic VB example:
*************************

Private Sub Command1_Click()
MsgBox "Hello, World"
End Sub

Private Sub Command2_Click()

MsgBox "Hello, World"
End Sub

Private Sub Command3_Click()

MsgBox "Hello, World"
End Sub

Private Sub Command4_Click()

MsgBox "Hello, World"
End Sub

Private Sub Command5_Click()

MsgBox "Hello, World"
End Sub

Private Sub Command6_Click()

MsgBox "Hello, World"
End Sub

Private Sub Command7_Click()

MsgBox "Hello, World"
End Sub

A VB.NET example:
**************************

Private Sub Button1_Click(ByVal sender As System.Object, ByVal e As
System.EventArgs)

Handles Button1.Click, Button2.Click, Button3.Click, Button4.Click,
Button5.Click, Button6.Click, Button7.Click,

[Michael C]

"Master Programmer" <master_p...@outgun.com> wrote in message
news:1165199087.4...@j44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

I prefer the c# version :-)

>

[Michael C]

"Blake" <bl...@zgeek.com> wrote in message
news:1165200305....@l12g2000cwl.googlegroups.com...

> Classic VB example:
> *************************
>
> Private Sub Command1_Click()
> MsgBox "Hello, World"
> End Sub
>
> Private Sub Command2_Click()
> MsgBox "Hello, World"
> End Sub
>
> Private Sub Command3_Click()
> MsgBox "Hello, World"
> End Sub
>
> Private Sub Command4_Click()
> MsgBox "Hello, World"
> End Sub
>
> Private Sub Command5_Click()
> MsgBox "Hello, World"
> End Sub
>
> Private Sub Command6_Click()
> MsgBox "Hello, World"
> End Sub
>
> Private Sub Command7_Click()
> MsgBox "Hello, World"
> End Sub

Never heard of control arrays?

> Private Sub Button1_Click(ByVal sender As System.Object, ByVal e As
> System.EventArgs)
> Handles Button1.Click, Button2.Click, Button3.Click, Button4.Click,
> Button5.Click, Button6.Click, Button7.Click,
> MessageBox.Show("Hello, World")
> End Sub

This isn't that good either as it would be better to use a for each
statement.

Michael

[Cor Ligthert [MVP]]

Blake,

Great answer, typical VB.Net style by the way.

Cor

"Blake" <bl...@zgeek.com> schreef in bericht
news:1165200305....@l12g2000cwl.googlegroups.com...

[Cor Ligthert [MVP]]

Strange: although I use both languages do I find especially the handling of
handlers very weak in C#.

Cor

"Michael C" <nos...@nospam.com> schreef in bericht
news:OCj3L40F...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

[Blake]

Handlers are not weak in C#. It's just that, in typical vb style, the
plumbing is connected automatically for VB with the Handles keyword. In
C# you have to do the plumbing yourself with the equivelant of the
AddHandler command. You can do it youself in VB too, sometimes this is
an advantage. ie:

private button1 as new button

AddHandler button1.Click , AddressOf Click

' add the button to a form...

...

Private Sub Click(sender as Object, e as EventArgs)

MessageBox("Hello World!")

End Sub

Esentially the Handles keyword is wiring the event delegates for you.
That is all.

[Cor Ligthert [MVP]]

Blake,

You can use the C# style in VB.Net in the same way, however you get
something extra in VB.Net, which is in my opinion in fact nicer as
documentation. (Although I use often the C# way in VB.Net).

Cor

"Blake" <bl...@zgeek.com> schreef in bericht

news:1165208806.9...@16g2000cwy.googlegroups.com...

[Michael C]

"Cor Ligthert [MVP]" <notmyfi...@planet.nl> wrote in message
news:OBnbTT2F...@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...

> Blake,
>
> You can use the C# style in VB.Net in the same way, however you get
> something extra in VB.Net, which is in my opinion in fact nicer as
> documentation. (Although I use often the C# way in VB.Net).

That is true but you also get inconsistency which can lead to problems for
maintenance programmers.

Michael

[Tim Patrick]

Any maintenance programmer worth hiring is not going to have a problem using
either syntax.

-----
Tim Patrick - www.timaki.com
Start-to-Finish Visual Basic 2005

[Blake]

Yes. Thats what I was pointing out :-)

I too prefer to manage handlers myself. Even in VB.

I guess I just like knowing as exactly as possible what is going on.

[Michael C]

"Tim Patrick" <inv...@invalid.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:e3b4697631948...@newsgroups.comcast.net...

> Any maintenance programmer worth hiring is not going to have a problem
> using either syntax.

That's not the point. Of course they can use either syntax but if 50 events
use one syntax and 1 event uses the other then I'd be suprised if they
didn't miss it.

Michael

[Master Programmer]

Harder to read

The Grand Master
"When you have climbed to the top of the mountain you can look down at
everyone."

[Tom Leylan]

Hi Blake:

I also prefer the AddHandler syntax and for the same reason you mention. I
find it more readable, more flexible and less ambiguous. One should never
mix the styles and I'd have the "Handles" code reworked if somebody
submitted them to me.

"Blake" <bl...@zgeek.com> wrote in message

news:1165213233.9...@f1g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

[RobinS]

You mean, "Harder for MasterProgrammer to read."

Robin S.
---------------------------------

"Master Programmer" <master_p...@outgun.com> wrote in message

news:1165224730.1...@j72g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

[Master Programmer]

Good programming is about leaving breadcrumbs for the next person. Not
trying to show off by writting code that is not immediatly obvious. If
it needs any comments to describe it - then you are a useless
programmer.

The Grand Master

[dbah...@hotmail.com]

you guys are full of shit

'managing handlers' is unnecessary complexity

[dbah...@hotmail.com]

I mean seriously here

'mybutton_click' in vb6?

it all used to be automagic.

I shouldn't ever need to change these.. mybutton_click should HANDLE
the CLICK event of mybutton

any other LOAD OF CRAP that you shove down my throat is going to be
responded to as 'VB.NET IS NOT TOO VERBOSE'

[Michael C]

"Tom Leylan" <g...@iamtiredofspam.com> wrote in message
news:%23lO0A96...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

> Hi Blake:
>
> I also prefer the AddHandler syntax and for the same reason you mention.
> I find it more readable, more flexible and less ambiguous. One should
> never mix the styles and I'd have the "Handles" code reworked if somebody
> submitted them to me.

I'm not sure that would be a good idea. The handles keyword supports the
designer where I presume the AddHandler does not.

Michael

[Michael C]

"Master Programmer" <master_p...@outgun.com> wrote in message

news:1165272758.2...@j72g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

> Good programming is about leaving breadcrumbs for the next person. Not
> trying to show off by writting code that is not immediatly obvious. If
> it needs any comments to describe it - then you are a useless
> programmer.

Hardly. I'd say if it needs comments to describe it and those comments are
missing then you're a sloppy programmer.

Michael

[dbah...@hotmail.com]

I think that the VB.net method is much more verbose and riduclous

-Aaron

[Blake]

You obviously don't do any async programming with .NET then?

If you don't know how to manage handlers yourself you will be in
trouble.

The Handles keyword is fine for wiring simple button click events.
Thats is the reason it is in VB and not C#

Someone at MS (rightly) assumed that handlers would be too conceptually
hard for some VB programmers. I guess they were right.

You just keep handling your button clicks and leave the real coding to
the professionals :-)

[RobinS]

"Michael C" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:OwIsrg$FHHA...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

What do you mean by that? You mean the designer, in terms of
double-clicking on the button to create the framework of
the event, or using the dropdowns?

Robin S.

[Michael C]

"RobinS" <Rob...@NoSpam.yah.none> wrote in message
news:S6OdnTgxFcZzSenY...@comcast.com...

> What do you mean by that? You mean the designer, in terms of
> double-clicking on the button to create the framework of
> the event, or using the dropdowns?

Either.

Michael

[aaron...@gmail.com]

you're full of shit its not necessary it's too verbose
you're full of shit its not necessary it's too verbose
you're full of shit its not necessary it's too verbose

[aaron...@gmail.com]

if it takes 30% more verbosity for 80% of the stuff that i do; then by
definition-- it's not worth it.

-Aaron

[Tom Leylan]

Hi Michael:

I think you'll find it is a good idea. It isn't easy for me to explain and
it has a tendency to draw out the "my language is better than yours" folks.
But for some 25 years I have cautioned people against using language or
platform "unique" solutions. The definition of a language-unique feature
would be one that isn't (generally) found in other languages. So variables,
functions loops and conditional tests aren't unique and should be used.
Something like instantiating a variable upon first use (the opposite of
OPTION EXPLICIT) is uncommon and generally a bad practice so I caution
people to avoid it. Unique features make it harder to translate from or to
other languages. dBASE for instance had a CLEAR ALL command which was
"easy" in some people's eyes but horrible from the perspective of a software
developer.

In any case the AddHandler syntax permits you to disable handlers, or to
change handlers at runtime and it is the mechanism used in C#. Similar
"handler-like" assignments are available in other languages but nothing but
VB.Net is going to have "Handles Button1.Click" type syntax. Reliance on
these types of things tends to lead to "VB programmers" instead of
programmers who use VB.

Your mileage may vary...

Tom

"Michael C" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:OwIsrg$FHHA...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

[Michael C]

"Tom Leylan" <g...@iamtiredofspam.com> wrote in message

news:e2M5hkCG...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

> In any case the AddHandler syntax permits you to disable handlers, or to
> change handlers at runtime and it is the mechanism used in C#. Similar
> "handler-like" assignments are available in other languages but nothing
> but VB.Net is going to have "Handles Button1.Click" type syntax. Reliance
> on these types of things tends to lead to "VB programmers" instead of
> programmers who use VB.
>
> Your mileage may vary...

You have an excellent point and agree in the majority of cases but not sure
about this one. There is extra work involved and I think it would be a
hassle not using the designer for events. I presume you can't double click
buttons to go to the code it executes and have to find this code manually.
It might not even be called buttonName_Click so you'd have to find the
AddHandler first. There's also the problem that it would be very easy to
accidentally add the event twice by double clicking a control. Basically
you're missing out on a large amount of functionality and adding some hassle
just to avoid a language specific keyword that would be very easy to
translate should the need arise.

It might just be easier to use C#. Using AddHandler in vb seems to me like a
programmer who wants to use c# but can't or won't for some reason :-)

Michael

[Cor Ligthert [MVP]]

Michael,

You know that it is more work to remove a method with handler in C# than in
VB.Net?

Cor

"Michael C" <nos...@nospam.com> schreef in bericht

news:OJJuJ7C...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

[Michael C]

"Cor Ligthert [MVP]" <notmyfi...@planet.nl> wrote in message

news:OGZDzTDG...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

> Michael,
>
> You know that it is more work to remove a method with handler in C# than
> in VB.Net?

Yes that is true, however it is only a small amount of extra work and
impossible to forget as it gives a compile error.

Michael

[Tom Leylan]

You can't double click the button and get to anything but the "Click"
handler can you? There are all sorts of handlers one could potentially want
to reference.

But it is much more than simply a matter of easier... as I pointed out the
Handles syntax isn't dynamic and can't be made dynamic. It is a simple
matter to point multiple controls (or events) to a single handler using
AddHandler() And it most likely isn't named buttonName_Click()... I don't
program "click handlers" I develop functionality which happens to execute
when a button is clicked. This gives one the flexibility to reassign the
handler to a different button or even a different non-button control.

It isn't about being a C# wannabe... C# is a case-sensitive language that
uses curly braces to delimit blocks of code and semicolons as line
terminators. I don't see any advantage to a case-sensitive language.

In any case I think you should continue to use the syntax you're happiest
with and I'll do the same :-)

Nice chatting with you.
Tom

"Michael C" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message

news:OJJuJ7C...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

[Michael C]

"Tom Leylan" <g...@iamtiredofspam.com> wrote in message

news:usOykeD...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

> You can't double click the button and get to anything but the "Click"
> handler can you?

No, but you can use the designer to get to other events by clicking on the
event tab (I presume vb has this?). Double clicking will only ever get the
default event, which in most cases is good enough, but with the designer
event window you can see all the events.

> But it is much more than simply a matter of easier... as I pointed out the
> Handles syntax isn't dynamic and can't be made dynamic.

In the rare case you need it to be dynamic (and these cases are quite rare)
then don't use the Handles keyword.

> It is a simple matter to point multiple controls (or events) to a single
> handler using AddHandler()

You can also do the same thing in the designer.

> It isn't about being a C# wannabe... C# is a case-sensitive language that
> uses curly braces to delimit blocks of code and semicolons as line
> terminators. I don't see any advantage to a case-sensitive language.

I don't use the case-sensitivity but there are many other reasons to use it
and none of the items you've listed here are reasons not to use it.

> In any case I think you should continue to use the syntax you're happiest
> with and I'll do the same :-)
>
> Nice chatting with you.

Oh, ok, see ya tom :-)

Michael

[RobinS]

I guess I don't mind using the Handles if there's not
a pattern to it. For example, if I wanted to hook up
the MouseEnter and MouseLeave event for all the textboxes
on the screen, then I'd use a loop and AddHandler.
But for one button's click event, I'd do the Handles
thing. Oh, dear, that means I'm mixing methods.

Robin S.
----------------------------

"Michael C" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message

news:uaxglPBG...@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

[RobinS]

I don't really see that it adds verbosity in terms of typing,
since if you double-click on the button, or use the dropdowns
in Visual Studio, it creates the framework of event code for you.
Mathematically speaking, I believe that's an even match -- 50%/50%.

Robin S.
-----------------------------------
<aaron...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1165286648....@j72g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

[guy]

people never look up to people who look down on them

[aaron...@gmail.com]

fully agree tom

I just don't want to be on the losing side of this argument.. if 90% of
the .NET programmers use C# then what are we doing here?

I just think that MS dealt us a raw deal; and I'm not willing to invest
my time in a new Microsoft-centric language.

I would rather use the old one-- than spend years gettign up to speed
only to find out that MS has killed the language after all.

I listened to rumors about MS Access for the past 10-15 years; and I
refuse to invest in an uncertain language again.

until Microsoft restores the 'VISUAL' and the word 'BASIC' to my
langauge they can lick my nuts

-Aaron

[RobinS]

<aaron...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1165335245.0...@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com...

>
> I just don't want to be on the losing side of this argument..

Too late!

Robin S.

[aaron...@gmail.com]

I don't care if the wizard generates the code.

it shouldn't be visible.. all it is, is that it's unnecessary and too
much work.

extra work + more extra work + no added benefits <> 50% / 50%

it's time to put the VISUAL and the BASIC back into VB

-Aaron

[aaron...@gmail.com]

people never look up to Junior Programmers aka VB.net wannabes

-Aaron

[The Grim Reaper]

Plenty of people look up to me :D
__________________________________
Grim
(Lead Engineer/HMI Technical Specialist/.NET Programmer)

<aaron...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1165348895.5...@f1g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

[aaron...@gmail.com]

yeah like retarded VB.net wannabes.

I heard that VB.net is going away
even if it's not C# is 5 times as popular

-Aaron

[The Grim Reaper]

What makes you persist eh?? LOL.

FYI: There are no other VB/VB.NET/.NET/whatever you refer to it as/VBA or C#
programmers in the entire company...

I heard that you were going away. Unfortunately someone made that up too.

To clarify: I'm a .NET programmer - not VB.NET - I don't import the
Microsoft.VisualBasic namespace.
If I want to use VB, I use VB6.
___________________________________
The Grimch

<aaron...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1165356782.8...@l12g2000cwl.googlegroups.com...

[Charlie Brown]

Anyone who has been working with .Net long enough should easily be able
to read both C# .NET and VB.NET anyway. If the code is written poorly
it won't matter whether it has Handles keywords or does all the hooks
by hand, it will still be bad code. Pick which flavor you like and get
rockin...

[aaron...@gmail.com]

lick my nuts, Charlie

compatability with C# is NOT a benefit of VB

C# is a fucking disease and the motherfucker who coninced MS to invent
a new language-- instead of taking VB 2002 seriously-- should be drawn
and quartered on live TV.

of course; it's a dead issue now.. C# has won the war... so now MS is
going to kill off VB.net sometime soon.

-Aaron

[Master Programmer]

Totaly true, who the fuck wants that other garbage to look at. Couldn't
have put it better myself Aaron.

The Grand Master
"When you have reached the top of the mountain
you can look down at everyone else."

[Tom Shelton]

On 2006-12-05, Blake <bl...@zgeek.com> wrote:
> You obviously don't do any async programming with .NET then?
>
> If you don't know how to manage handlers yourself you will be in
> trouble.
>
> The Handles keyword is fine for wiring simple button click events.
> Thats is the reason it is in VB and not C#
>

I think that is a little misleading... I mean your right, there is nothing
really equivalent to handles in C# (thank goodness), it doesn't mean that the
IDE won't automatically wire up events for you. You can just double click
your little button and get a default event handler just like you do in VB.NET
- the difference is that if at some point I want to change it a runtime I can
:)

Really, I find VB.NET's handling of events cumbersome. My main problem with
VB.NET isn't that its a basic style language - it's that it is to dang wordy
:) Oh, and it's case insensitive - drives me nuts! I like to be able to do
this:

public class TheClass
{
private int theInt;

public int TheInt
{
get { return this.theInt; }
set { this.theInt = value; }
}
}

In VB.NET, I have to resort to the dreaded underscore:

Public Class TheClass
Private _theInt As Integer

Public Property TheInt As Integer
Get
Return Me._theValue
End Get
Set
Me._theValue = Value
End Set
End Property
End Class

Blah, blah, blah. To much typing.

--
Tom Shelton

[Charlie Brown]

I use VB.NET BTW... and I wasn't talking about compatibility, I was
referring to readability. It's like any spoken language, they have the
same meaning just different symbols and words to get there. Who cares
if someone speaks German, Italian, or English? What matters is the
association the words represent. You can do the same thing in both
languages, who cares HOW you do it.

[aaron...@gmail.com]

you can't do the same thing in VB.net.

it's not practical.

do you know why?? because C# already got critical mass.. and MS doesn't
give a shit about VB anymore

-Aaron

[Cor Ligthert [MVP]]

Tom,

Today I selected in a C# project 30 controls, I mistyped an 30 events where
created.

In VB.Net it is just selecting and deleting.

Try it in your most important C# project.

Cor

"Tom Shelton" <tom_s...@comcastXXXXXXX.net> schreef in bericht
news:efqdneQRrPk1HOvY...@comcast.com...

[Master Programmer]

No code should EVER need one single comment if it is written properly.
It should be easy to follow without ANY explanation needed. If your
code needs comments to describe it then I suggest you go back to
school.

The Grand Master

Michael C wrote:
> "Master Programmer" <master_p...@outgun.com> wrote in message

> news:1165272758.2...@j72g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > Good programming is about leaving breadcrumbs for the next person. Not
> > trying to show off by writting code that is not immediatly obvious. If
> > it needs any comments to describe it - then you are a useless
> > programmer.
>
> Hardly. I'd say if it needs comments to describe it and those comments are
> missing then you're a sloppy programmer.
>
> Michael

[Tim Patrick]

While I always recommend adding comments, it might be true that in business
programming many comments are only there for "backup purposes." But not all
programming is of a business nature. I once worked at a company that was
developing a PowerPoint-type program for a non-Windows platform. The main
programmer was in his 50s and had something like two PhD's in advanced physics,
etc. He was coding algorithms for 3D slide-transition animations in his head.
Wow!

In one of the transitions, the user could enable a colored border around
the slide that was entering or leaving, a slide that was flipping this way
and that way. There was a bug in the transition that caused the border to
draw incorrectly at certain angles. Guess who's job it became to fix the
bug. (Me.) Guess who didn't add any comments to his source code. (Mr. Genius
PhD.) Guess who had a really hard time fixing the bug. (That would be me,
again.) I decided that day to never write a program devoid of comments.

-----
Tim Patrick - www.timaki.com
Start-to-Finish Visual Basic 2005

[RobinS]

I don't agree. I've written some really complicated programs
with complex statistical calculations, and I always put
in comments, if not for the poor guy who comes after me, then
for me 6 months later when I'm no longer working on it, and I
have to go back and fix it. It's been 2 years since I left
that software behind, and I still get e-mails thanking me for
documenting my code so well.

Robin S.
----------------------------------

"Master Programmer" <master_p...@outgun.com> wrote in message

news:1165455921.9...@n67g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...

[Cor Ligthert [MVP]]

Tim and Robin,

Do you know what is the trouble with me.

I can always better read code than even my own in any language written
comments.

Beside me I have seen that most developers are not given with rich
possibilities to write comments (and to tell something you can disagree with
me; I have seen that those who are able to write very nice comments often
make very bad code).

Just my thought,

:-)

Cor

"RobinS" <Rob...@NoSpam.yah.none> schreef in bericht
news:SYudnYThpPA_AOrY...@comcast.com...

[Bruce W. Darby]

Sir,

While I apprciate your forthright comment that you write code that ANYONE
can follow without any trouble at all, experience has taught me that the
only one that could possibly understand uncommented code is the person that
wrote that code. And if the person that wrote that code doesn't have a
photographic memory, it is very clear that they will not remember the
millions of lines of code that they wrote during their career.

I'm fairly new to programing, though I have been in the computer industry
for several years. I actually got to work on some uncommented code that had
been written in a language that had been 'extrapolated' from the C
programming language. Took me almost three weeks to fix the issue because I
had to 'learn' the language and then try to figure out what had been
written. If the code had been commented, the job may have taken me a lot
less time than it did.

"Master Programmer" <master_p...@outgun.com> wrote in message

news:1165455921.9...@n67g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...

[RobinS]

I understand what you're saying. I'm not talking about comments
like this:

'define a variable to hold the count
Dim count as Integer

I'm talking about comments like this, that explain something out of
the ordinary, or explain *why* something is done a particular way:

'routine X seems like the logical place to put this instead
' of here in routine Y, but if you put it there instead of
' here, the dire consequences will be this
' (insert dire consequences). So even though this
' seems counterintuitive, don't move it. You'll regret it.
(seemingly oddly-placed code)

Robin S.
---------------------

"Cor Ligthert [MVP]" <notmyfi...@planet.nl> wrote in message

news:O5D4L0bG...@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...

[Master Programmer]

Why name it X or Y. Surely a variable named "loop_Counter" or
"array_Count" or "employee_Split" would be more intuative.

The Grand Master

[Master Programmer]

And rightly so, they must permission first

The Grand Master

[Tom Shelton]

On 2006-12-06, Cor Ligthert [MVP] <notmyfi...@planet.nl> wrote:
> Tom,
>
> Today I selected in a C# project 30 controls, I mistyped an 30 events where
> created.
>

I'm not sure what you mean here?

> In VB.Net it is just selecting and deleting.
>
> Try it in your most important C# project.

Yes, if you manually delete the methods, it can be fun manually deleting the
event handlers from initialize component. and your right, that doesn't happen
in VB.NET - but it happens so in frequently to me that I still see the C# way
of doing thing as a net advantage.

Don't get me wrong - I have no ill feelings against VB.NET. I just happen to
like C-style languages is all. It is what I have done most.

--
Tom Shelton

[Cor Ligthert [MVP]]

Robin,

Your particular comment suggest that the one who read it is able to
understand what you are saying.

In this case he needs some more than average knowledge of code to understand
why something is done. That one does not need your comment, he/she sees it
and thinks, whow I would not have done it that way, however according the
quality of the rest of the program the developer should have had a special
reason for that. Let me think twice and than probably sees the why.

For a beginner this kind of comments has no sense even with the comment they
don't understand it.

However again just my personal opinion.

In my opinion a good comment can be:
'See document xyz for an explanation of mathematics in the used code

Cor

"RobinS" <Rob...@NoSpam.yah.none> schreef in bericht

news:tMqdnZ0zb7T3MerY...@comcast.com...

[Master Programmer]

> I'm fairly new to programing, though I have been in the computer industry

That shows. Go off and spend a few years learning how to program then
come back with some useful comments. In the meantime shut your
cake-hole.

No-one wants to read a load of boring comments saying exactly what to
do with a piece of code. If the code is written properly then there
should not be any need to add "one single comment". Good code is easy
to read - bad code needs comments - end of story. Any statement to the
contrary is absolutly incorrect.

I find it disturbing that the language EVEN PERMITS you to add
comments. That is a feature that should be removed, thereby forcing
people to program properly, instead of being lazy-idle shites that
think they can add a bit of text to mask their inadequate skills.

The Grand Master

[RobinS]

Um, I don't name it X or Y, it's just an example. Please don't make
me look through the 50,000 lines of code in the last project I wrote
to find the perfect example.

Robin S.

--------------------------
"Master Programmer" <master_p...@outgun.com> wrote in message

news:1165471215.6...@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com...

[RobinS]

It *does* help if he has more than average knowledge, but I
don't like to assume that whoever comes along behind me *does*.
Plus, why should the poor guy have to spend extra time figuring
it out, when I can just put in a comment for him?

Also, frequently it's a business-rule kind of thing, that's
not documented anywhere for the programmer. While I *love*
to get written business requirements from my clients, I rarely do.

The specs for the last application I wrote were in the form
of a bunch of fields written on a piece of paper torn out of
a spiral notebook with the instructions "These are in three
different applications that we use, can you please figure out
how to get only *our* data out of those applications, for
only these fields, and put them in a central repository for us?"

I like to leave external documentation behind with my finished
applications (in this case, I documented the database/table/fieldname,
and in most cases, the query used), but that's not always possible.

To each their own, I just like to leave a helping hand to
whoever comes along behind me. It only takes me a few seconds.
(I type 100+ wpm).

Robin S.
---------------------------------

"Cor Ligthert [MVP]" <notmyfi...@planet.nl> wrote in message

news:uGlJsecG...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

[RobinS]

All I have to say is this: you must not write anything
very complicated.

Robin S.
--------------------------------------------

"Master Programmer" <master_p...@outgun.com> wrote in message

news:1165475085.4...@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com...

[C-Services Holland b.v.]

Master Programmer wrote:
> No code should EVER need one single comment if it is written properly.
> It should be easy to follow without ANY explanation needed. If your
> code needs comments to describe it then I suggest you go back to
> school.
>
> The Grand Master
>
>

I disagree. Complex patterns need comments. In that explain what the
code does and why a certain method is chosen. A comment of 2 or 3 lines
can perfectly explain what code of multiple pages does. It certainly
helps maintaining the app especially if another person needs to go in
and add/change stuff in there. For instance I've used comments to
indicate why I chose a particular way of doing stuff because some quirk
in a programming language made it impossible to do it the obvious way.
That prevents someone going in in the future and changing it only to
find out the obvious way doesn't work.

For small routines consisting of just a few lines I agree it's not
always really nescesarry, but for big complex things not using comments
is just bad for future maintainence

--
Rinze van Huizen
C-Services Holland b.v

[rowe_newsgroups]

> > I'm fairly new to programing, though I have been in the computer industry
>
> That shows. Go off and spend a few years learning how to program then
> come back with some useful comments. In the meantime shut your
> cake-hole.

Welcome to the newsgroup Bruce! I'm sure this goes without saying, but
this guy is nothing more than a wannabe programmer who gets a rush out
of flaming others. So believe it or not your opinions are welcome here,
dispite what this "Master Programmer" says. I promise - most of us here
are nice :-)

Oh and Master Programming, if you want to prove you're not a wannabe
please provide us with some proof - perhaps posting your real name, and
some projects and companies you've worked on/for would help. As for
right now all you are is talk, and nothing else.

> Good code is easy to read - bad code needs comments - end of story

You know, I would love to see how you pull this off when dealing with
complex problems. Again, do you even have any of your source code
published anywhere that we could take a look at? And I don't mean small
"Hello World" programs or database frontends, I want to see something
complex - something that we meager programmers would "need" to use
comments for.

As far as my opinion on the issue, I dislike using comments inside my
routines, and use them only sparingly (like complicated loops or some
API calls). Placing comments inside the procedure itself (imo) makes it
hard to follow whats going on in the code (mainly from switching from
the code reading mindset to the english reading mindset) To me, using
the '''<Summary>...></Summary> tags on any routine that does something
out of the ordinary is a great way to let others (or yourself 6 months
later) know immediately what the purpose is.

Any programmer can figure out any code if he/she is given enough time.
If that same programming is given good comments they will be able to
figure that same code in much less time. This is what comments are for
- they are not excuses for bad code, they are for getting others up to
speed on the code faster. Why would you force someone to read through a
page of code to figure out what is going on when one or two lines of
comments code explain it? The time saved in not reading through the
page of code is more enough reason to include well structured comments.

Thanks,

Seth Rowe

[aaron...@gmail.com]

Michael;

I disagree

Master Programmer is always right.. haven't you guys seen the pattern
so far?

We forecasted just a week ago-- this new press release about how VB.net
usage is down 30%

they're going to kill it off soon; C# won the war.. MS officially
killed the worlds most popular language.

I heard it from a friend that works at MSFT

-Aaron

Michael C wrote:
> "Master Programmer" <master_p...@outgun.com> wrote in message

[Tim Patrick]

The Top 10 Misconceptions about Commenting and Style (from The Visual Basic
.NET Style Guide)

1. Comments are extraneous since you can always understand the logic by looking
at the code.
2. Indenting just wastes disk space.
3. I don't have time to add comments.
4. What does it matter how sloppy the code is? I'm not selling the source
code.
5. Adding comments doesn't make the code run any better.
6. Hey man, don't bother me. This is my trademark coding style.
7. I comment every line of code. It makes the program so readable.
8. If there's a bug, I'll be able to fix it. It's not like I'm going to forget
what this function does.
9. I'll go back later and add in the comments.
10. It's job security. If others can understand my code, they don't need me.

-----
Tim Patrick - www.timaki.com
Start-to-Finish Visual Basic 2005

> I find it disturbing that the language EVEN PERMITS you to add

[aaron...@gmail.com]

comments are unnecessary

speak english or die

-Aaron

[aaron...@gmail.com]

Tom

if you're a commie fucking bastard and you like C# then get the fuck
out of our newsgroup

-Aaron

[RobinS]

It's not your newsgroup. You said you're doing PHP, not VB.Net.
So by your own definition, *you* should leave.

Robin S.
-----------------------------------
<aaron...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1165518541.8...@j44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

[The Grim Reaper]

Complicated?!?!
I'd go so far as to say he can't even type and everything you've been
reading here was dictated to his mum.

"RobinS" <Rob...@NoSpam.yah.none> wrote in message
news:OqidnUKfHOPwXerY...@comcast.com...

[aaron...@gmail.com]

you can't discredit people-- just because they disagree with you.

VB.net has officially been retired.

why are we still in a newsgroup called VB.net?

VB 2005 is a complete failure in the open market.
THE LANGUAGE IS _STILL_ TOO VERBOSE.

MS needs to go back to the drawing board; VB is neither Visual or
Basic.

They need to either rename the language 'B#' or 'VB#' in order to show
that they still love VB half as much as we do.

-Aaron

[Herfried K. Wagner [MVP]]

"Master Programmer" <master_p...@outgun.com> schrieb:

> No code should EVER need one single comment if it is written properly.
> It should be easy to follow without ANY explanation needed. If your
> code needs comments to describe it then I suggest you go back to
> school.

Basically I tend to agree. Code should IMO be readable (which means that
the reader can reconstruct its meaning) without any comments, but comments
should support the reader by making understanding the meaning of the source
code easier.

--
M S Herfried K. Wagner
M V P <URL:http://dotnet.mvps.org/>
V B <URL:http://dotnet.mvps.org/dotnet/faqs/>

[aaron...@gmail.com]

fully agree.

Long Live Master Programmer!

-Aaron

[RobinS]

<aaron...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1165526567....@j44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

> you can't discredit people-- just because they disagree with you.

And yet, that's what you do every single time you post one of
your caustic messages in this newsgroup.

> VB.net has officially been retired.

Only in your tiny little mind.

Robin S.

[RobinS]

LOL. Loved #2.

And if you delete some of those files on your computer,
it won't weigh as much. (attribution: Scott Adams)

Robin S.
----------------------------------
"Tim Patrick" <inv...@invalid.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:e3b46976349e8...@newsgroups.comcast.net...

[RobinS]

Well, yeah, that's a good point. Silly me. Now I'm acting
like Robinson and arguing with a grapefruit.

Robin S.
(*not* to be confused with Robinson or Tim Patrick
or Francesca Balena or Brian Noyes or Bill Gates or
Larry Ellison)
-------------------------
"The Grim Reaper" <dontb...@Idontwanttoknow.com> wrote in message
news:KYqdnW1EC5o...@bt.com...

[RobinS]

Hmmm. He seemed to be speaking pretty good English.
Are your glasses up-to-date?

Robin S.
--------------------------
<aaron...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1165518459.7...@16g2000cwy.googlegroups.com...

[Tim Patrick]

I worked with a lady who wrote to Scott Adams the idea about "smaller font
sizes taking up less disk space." She got a "thanks for the idea" letter
back from Adams and a preview copy of the panels for that particular Dilbert
strip, which she prized.

[RobinS]

Wow, that's so cool.

My only Scott-Adams-claim-to-fame is I worked across the street
from where he worked (Pacific Bell), and in the middle of layoffs
(at our company), we e-mailed him and asked if we could take him
to lunch (it was before he was *quite* as popular), and he consented.
It was cool. He was really nice; signed all our books. :-)

Robin S.

------------------------
"Tim Patrick" <inv...@invalid.com.invalid> wrote in message

news:e3b4697634fd8...@newsgroups.comcast.net...

[aaron...@gmail.com]

I don't discredit people that are speaking the truth.

you see.. i have this magical power called 'TRUTH' on my side.

the TRUTH is that MS made this newsgroup name RIDICULOUSLY LONG and I
won't put up with it.

the TRUTH is that microsoft.com/vb USED TO WORK

you guys sit there and say 'oh its not a big deal' but it's OBVIOUS
THAT MICROSOFTS VB.NET STRATEGY IS STILL FAILING

-Aaron

[rowe_newsgroups]

> the TRUTH is that MS made this newsgroup name RIDICULOUSLY LONG and I
> won't put up with it.

You said in another post you use Goggle Groups to post, so why not
click "Add to favorites" in your browser? Or is this approach too
"verbose" and two much work for you?

Or even better, you could go to the comp.lang.php newsgroup and leave
us to our "dead" (your opinion not mine) language.

Thanks,

Seth Rowe

[Tom Leylan]

Robin:

How can we hope to have reasonable conversations when people are arguing
against comments. I don't know where they work but I've seen millions of
lines of code and I'm sure each programmer thought the code was completely
clear when in fact it was plainly not. What seems obvious as it is being
written won't be so obvious 3 years later when 8 of the original programmers
have quit. But let's say I include a SSort() routine, would developers
recognize it as a "stable sort" just by reading the code? I'll guess that
90% of the VB programmers haven't heard of a stable sort so how can they
recognize one? I'll also guess "what a dork doesn't he know there is a sort
method" is what some of the folks here would say.

But that is only one use of comments. They have been elevated in status
through the use of things like JavaDoc (in Java). In large apps I've seen
3, 4 and 5 versions of "identical functionality" simply because none of the
programmers knew the other functions existed when they wrote their own local
version. An automated system for producing printed documentation would go a
long way to reducing this stuff.

We also use them to track changes. With business critical apps (and I mean
daily or weekly turnaround schedules) it is important to know what changed,
who changed it, when it was changed and why it was changed. There is no
more sensible place to put this information than next to the code that
actually changed. And if you made a undocumented modification and the $14
million a year client dropped the company because your change ruined their
system you can bet there would be repercussions.

They aren't fun, and the system isn't perfect but how on Earth can anybody
be arguing against commenting? I suspect it's a game... the "your code is
inferior because you have to comment it" gambit. But my code isn't inferior
it is as good or better and it has reasonable and useful comments as well.

These types of threads come about continually, it's part of the coming of
age of software developers. I've had programmers (who "knew" they were the
greatest) tell me that programmers don't read documentation. When I
challenged that statement he asked if I thought the majority of programmers
read the docs and I answered, "no not the majority, just the good ones."

Well that's my 2 cents... everybody carry on :-)

"RobinS" <Rob...@NoSpam.yah.none> wrote in message

news:Bo2dndYoUMupXerY...@comcast.com...

[aaron...@gmail.com]

ROFL

good stuff.

it doesn't mean that other people don't have a problem finding it.

how much more popular is the C# newsgroup?

do you think that VB.net is just magically dying?

it's a few simple image things like this.. and microsoft.com/vb not
working-- that make it appear as if MS doesn't sell VB anymore

yes; it is a fucking pain in the ass.

yes; it is important that ms gets this correctly.

it just flat out pisses me off; I hate the 'DOTNET' moniker.. and VB
2005 is not VB.net in ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM. IT IS CALLED VB 2005 NOT
VB.NET 2005

This would be like MS calling the next version of Windows 'Windows 95
Vista'

ROFL

I made a funny :)

-Aaron

[Cor Ligthert [MVP]]

Tom,

How can we hope to have a reasonable conversation when people are arguing
before comments.

Comments should not be needed (with the exception as Robin told and I in
fact before him, that is to find where the underlying documentation for a
piece of code is or arguments why it is not done in another way when that is
more obvious).

You probably have never worked with well documentative program languages. I
did and I have seen people ruing those language making it a kind of
assembler and than fulfilling it with comments.

Robin has stated it in my idea very well although not in one thread.

I have seen a bunch of rotten code, very well commented because the
developer could not make a well written program.

I have seen often very well programs, unreadable because the programmer most
probably was driven by his manager to write comments. After deleting the
comments I could very well understand the program.

Therefore a well written program don't need comments which tell as Robin
already said.

'define a variable to hold the count
Dim count as Integer

That is 90% (not even 80 as I normal write) the comments I have seen in my
live.

(spare me messages about my writting style I wrote it quick and very much
from my hart).

Cor

"Tom Leylan" <g...@iamtiredofspam.com> schreef in bericht
news:O9%23AFVuG...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

[Cor Ligthert [MVP]]

Robin,

As you are longer active in these dotNet newsgroup you will (with messages)
meet more famous writers, I only know one who is not kind.

:-)

Cor

"RobinS" <Rob...@NoSpam.yah.none> schreef in bericht

news:iuadnYtKp5NnYuXY...@comcast.com...

[aaron...@gmail.com]

using appropriate names and comments are 2 seperate issues

-Aaron

[RobinS]

Well, it does depend on the code. As I said, and Cor agreed
with, adding comments that repeat the code is redundant. I
just add them to explain why I chose a particular method --
maybe because of something else that's happening somewhere
in the (huge) application, or because of a business reason.
Or if the code is really complicated, I'll put something in
to give the general idea.

I have known a lot of programmers that don't believe in it, but
my guess is they've never written anything so complicated it
requires a 30-page document just to explain the calculations
(been there, wrote the document), or they *have*, but they've
never had to change it or maintain it. *Or* they don't mind
spending days going through every line of code trying to figure
out exactly what it does. Ugh.

I even worked for one person who went through and *removed* my
comments. They said it made it harder for them to read the code.
About a year later, they called up and asked if I had a copy of
the code w/the comments in it (I did), and could I help them
figure something out because they had to change something in the
business logic, and they didn't have enough time to figure it
out by going through the code.

I guess the bottom line is that I tend to be detail-oriented,
and think about the long-term, and a few comments in the code
seems to make sense to me. I also have an appalling habit of
writing documentation for the really complicated stuff (like
the aforementioned calculations) to leave behind me. That's
just me.

Other people can make their own choices.

And that's *my* two cents'.

Robin S.
---------------------------------------------

"Tom Leylan" <g...@iamtiredofspam.com> wrote in message
news:O9%23AFVuG...@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...

[RobinS]

Yes, I know what you mean -- I've noticed that pattern. :-)

Robin S.
---------------------
"Cor Ligthert [MVP]" <notmyfi...@planet.nl> wrote in message

news:u%23JKIDvG...@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

[Bruce W. Darby]

Ah, so being a new programmer automatically relegates me to the level of
being a 'cakehole'? Unworthy of nothing but your ire and derision? I
apologize to you if my statements made you feel so insecure that you had to
respond in the manner that you have. I was simply making the statement that
you cannot expect anyone to understand another's code without comments.Yet
you responded like any other troll would respond, with nothing but inane
tripe about something you know NOTHING about. If you wish to continue coding
without making comments, then by all means do so. But you should note deride
others because they think the practice is good and well-intentioned.

"Master Programmer" <master_p...@outgun.com> wrote in message

[Bruce W. Darby]

Seth,

Thanks for the welcome. I've lived too many years to allow someone like
'Master Programmer' to get under my skin. :)

Thanks for the welcome

[Bruce W. Darby]

> it doesn't mean that other people don't have a problem finding it.

Aaron,

Wasn't hard to find at all. Went to my newsreader and typed 'vb' into the
search box. came right up with any group that had vb in the title.
Highlighted the group and then clicked on the GoTo button and here I am. :)

[Master Programmer]

' Say good by to the apostrophe

// because it's forward slash's for you all soon.

The Grand Master
VB 6.0 Jihad - Fight for your history and future

[Master Programmer]

I didnt call you a cake-hole you idiot, I told you to shut your
cake-hole (your fucking mouth). When you have aquired a lot of
experience (like me) then - AND ONLY THEN - will you be permitted to
add your opinion.

It is common knowledge that bad programmers leave comments (maybe not
so common around here - LOL). If you want to add a load of comments
saying what every single line of your code does thats up to you.
However if you were a real expert you wouldnt need to.

The Grand Master
VB 6.0 Jihad - Take back what belongs to us

[Bruce W. Darby]

So you admit that you cannot respond to a simple comment with anything less
than complete and utter filth. A programmer of many years, such as you claim
to be, is an educated individual who would not NEED to use such filth to get
his point across. The only time I have seen the use of such language is from
uneducated, young trolls on the Internet who think that the bastion of
separation that they are provided by the Internet allows them to speak any
way they wish without consequence. Thank you for bearing out my supposition
so clearly.

And I have not stated that commenting "every single line of code' is
necessary. YOU tried to put those words into my mouth. Quite unsanitary, to
say the least. :) I simply stated that commenting code is a good business
practice.

"Master Programmer" <master_p...@outgun.com> wrote in message

news:1165669777....@l12g2000cwl.googlegroups.com...

>I didnt call you a cake-hole you idiot, I told you to shut your
> cake-hole (your fucking mouth). When you have aquired a lot of
> experience (like me) then - AND ONLY THEN - will you be permitted to
> add your opinion.
>
> It is common knowledge that bad programmers leave comments (maybe not
> so common around here - LOL). If you want to add a load of comments
> saying what every single line of your code does thats up to you.
> However if you were a real expert you wouldnt need to.

Master Programmer, long ago I learned never to consider myself an 'expert'.
The more I learn, the more I realize I don't know. I live with the knowledge
that I am never going to 'know it all'. And yet, I am good with that. If you
need the security blanket of the Internet to pound your chest and tell the
world that you are better than anyone else, just remember... an 'ex' is a
has been... and a 'spert' is a drip under pressure!

[RobinS]

"Master Programmer" <master_p...@outgun.com> wrote in message

news:1165669024.0...@79g2000cws.googlegroups.com...

>' Say good by to the apostrophe
>
> // because it's forward slash's for you all soon.
>
> The Grand Master
> VB 6.0 Jihad - Fight for your history and future
>

//I can deal with that.
//I'm *flexible*.

Robin S.

[Master Programmer]

Hey Aaaron

Check this out ! RobinS has finally admitted that VB is going to be
history.

Steve

[verity...@yahoo.com.au]

You are just as immature and pathetic as Master Programmer. The only
reason he is still here is because he keeps getting a response from you
- and you always reply. I think you should both grow up.

S Verity

[Bruce W. Darby]

Miss, or Ms,. Verity,

So you think I'm immature? My apologies, but Master Programmer, and Aaron
Kempf as well, have been getting posts from more folk than myself. Some very
good and well thought out posts as well. If I am immature to respond to a
person who is using profanity and degrading me as a human being, then so be
it. If you wish to just stick your head in the sand and hope that he will
just 'go away', then you are the immature one. He was here long before I
started posting here and he'll most likely be here long after I'm gone, from
the sound of things. I have done the 'right' mature thing and blocked any
messages from him from my newsreader. I do thank you for your response to
me, but you come across as a heavy-handed 'do what I say, not what I do'
type. If I am off-base on this, then I do submit my most abject apologies.
But before you start calling folks pathetic, think of what the reaction will
be to how YOU are perceived from your post.

<verity...@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:1165712043....@l12g2000cwl.googlegroups.com...