MS.NET: VB.NET or C#

[Jacob]

Exadon and I are talking about MS.NET. We are trying to figure out the best course of action.

We both know C# and a very small amount of VB.NET. The advantages of VB.NET are that most using the current MS would be a bit more familiar with the new syntax of VB.Net as opposed to learning C#.

This time I'm not just converting the source, it will be a full rewrite with current coding standards. We will be fully commenting and documenting the code.

[Exadon]

My vote is for C#...why you ask?

Because I will be coding part of the damn thing! I know C# better than I know VB.net. I am fine with either or though...but you should vote C#

oh and yes we will be documenting...and commenting...and more documenting...and than some more comments on the comments and documentation.

A lot of work...but in the end will be worth it.

[Jared]

I Vote C#.

[Jack]

ill help if its in C# im learning it now and im pritty good at it if i do say so my self.

[Rian]

I also vote c#. Though, I'd love to see a MS4.Net as well.

[Jack]

I can could try convert to C# later on in the year.

[Beres]

either one is awesome.. if its c# then it will give me a reason to learn c#.

[Jack]

I wouldn't learn a language you just want to learn so you can try code something, i would learn a language that your really want to learn, and if you like it. There is no point in learning the language if it isn't your thing =).

[Rian]

Personally, I can't learn from a book. I've tried learning C#, didn't happen. I'll pick it up if Mirage gets converted. Basically what I'm saying is that just because Beres and I are taking the approach you described doesn't mean that we

Code:

I wouldn't learn a language you just want to learn so you can try code something

As you sort of redundantly put it

[Jack]

Lol. Ok but that was my opinion of learning a code, and btw in use quote not code ;D

[GIAKEN]

Umm...did Jack just try to correct an oldbie?

[Rian]

I realized that I inserted your text as code instead of a quote. I didn't change it because I didn't give a shit, and didn't expect anyone else would either.

[Tony]

Yes. Don't embarrass yourself anymore, Jack.

[Matt]

It's not MS if it's not a conversion.

[Aydan]

I'm a programming failure but I say C# since it's multi platform and will never become outdated wheras in the future .net will probably become obsolete just like vb6 did.

gives me an excuse to get off my ass and try learning too.

[Nean]

C#

[Beres]

Personally, I can't learn from a book. I've tried learning C#, didn't happen. I'll pick it up if Mirage gets converted. Basically what I'm saying is that just because Beres and I are taking the approach you described doesn't mean that we

Code:

I wouldn't learn a language you just want to learn so you can try code something

As you sort of redundantly put it

That's how it is with me. Books don't help. I learned VB6 from mirage like 3-4 years ago. So if it gets done in C#, I have the opportunity to learn. Im not learning the language just so I can program with the engine, I've always wanted to learn C# and VB.NET, so either one I don't really care what its programmed in.

[ExoShox]

i already plan on learning C, C# and C++. I want to learn this stuff but honestly, if i dont have an incentive, itll take me much longer. the reason im learning VB6 so quickly is because i had an incentive. MS was coded in VB6 and XtremeWorlds scripting was SadScript. It gave me an incentive to learn it because its something i needed to do what i did. i vote MS #. MS .NET is not going to help me learn a multi platform language.

[Dragoons Master]

I'm a programming failure but I say C# since it's multi platform and will never become outdated wheras in the future .net will probably become obsolete just like vb6 did.

gives me an excuse to get off my ass and try learning too.

Just to formalize things here:
C# AND VB.Net are BOTH ".Net".
".Net" is a framework.
We just don't say "C#.Net".
VB.Net is just the same chit as C# when compiled. It's all CIL.

[GIAKEN]

I vote either Whitespace or Brainfuck.

[Matt]

As easy as it is to convert C# to VB.Net, why not do BOTH?

[Coke]

C# will FORCE people to learn a language that matters, so C# all the way.

[unknown]

C# is much better... the syntax is cleaner and you can use XNA with C# but not vb.net (meaning if someone is ambitious enough, mirage could run on an xbox 360)

All and all it doesn't really matter which language you choose because it's incredibly easy to convert from one to the other and they both run on the .net framework.

[Aydan]

I'm a programming failure but I say C# since it's multi platform and will never become outdated wheras in the future .net will probably become obsolete just like vb6 did.

gives me an excuse to get off my ass and try learning too.

Just to formalize things here:
C# AND VB.Net are BOTH ".Net".
".Net" is a framework.
We just don't say "C#.Net".
VB.Net is just the same chit as C# when compiled. It's all CIL.

Aha. Well, I feel stupid but only shows im a programming failure

What's the deal with C++ then? Is that it's own format or is that based off some kinda framework too?

[unknown]

I'm a programming failure but I say C# since it's multi platform and will never become outdated wheras in the future .net will probably become obsolete just like vb6 did.

gives me an excuse to get off my ass and try learning too.

Just to formalize things here:
C# AND VB.Net are BOTH ".Net".
".Net" is a framework.
We just don't say "C#.Net".
VB.Net is just the same chit as C# when compiled. It's all CIL.

Aha. Well, I feel stupid but only shows im a programming failure

What's the deal with C++ then? Is that it's own format or is that based off some kinda framework too?

C++ isn't an interpreted language, it doesn't have it's own framework.

.NET and java are interpreted, when you compile them they are converted to bytecode which is read by the .NET or java interpreter which convert the bytecode to machine code and runs them. C++ is generally faster because when you compile it is converted to machine code, so you don't need an interpreter to run it.