>I think you're wrong. VB is at the end of the line of language expansion. All future expansion will go into the CLR. The language will grow only to support new 'basic language structures' no more new 'feature enhancements'. Same as C# for that matter... Languages are dead as of now in the Microsoft world. It's the CLR that will see all the excitement - languages now will see little more than compiler optimizations which really doesn't even happen at the language level either but at the IL compiler level which is also the CLR.
>

You don't see new language features for VB? You don't think we will see new functions, etc? I do agree that MS appears to be de-emphasizing languages in favor of the .NET framework.

IMO, I think your critique of VB is too harsh and ignores the business realities of just how productive and successful the language has been. Perhaps at a certain technical level, your critique has merit. But, when balanced with what one can actually accomplish with the language, I have to greatly discount the technical arguments...

>
I think that's the point everybody here except you has been making all along. Since the languages are on equal footing sans some minor exceptions (unmanaged code mainly) there's no reason to have allegiance to one or the other.
>

What are you talking about. All along, I have been making the claim that the framework is the area to focus on - not a specific language. I have all along said that regardless of whether you choose VB or C# - in all material respects, it does not matter. As for the unmanaged code feature, if that is something that one needs to do, then I guess C# would be the correct technical alternative.


>
My point is simply this: If you plan on learning .NET the language is going to have the least impact on your learning curve. The curve is learning the CLR functionality which is a huge shift from the current COM/system model of development.
>

Do you believe C# has an advantage here?


>
As I said it's all a matter of preference. I find VB verbose. But I have C++ background, so to me using scope notation and virtual function pointer syntax makes more sense then the new VB keywords for this stuff that are out of line with any other programming language - IMHO, VB always had this problem on *purposefully* doing things differently than most other language standards and for no good technical reason. There would have been a good case to make VB more like C# (and most other languages) for new functionality (class creation/inheritance structure in particular) in a lot of respects. The closer the resemblence the easier to switch between the two.
>

Perhaps that is where we disagree. I don't see the verboseness (did I make up a word here??) of a language has being an inherently bad thing. Perhaps the euphamism for verbose is declarative...

>And FWIW, I think that anybody who works with the CLR will have to be fluent at least in passing with both languages because you will have to read other people's code whether it's in articles, books or code that is part of your project.
>

VERY good point here....


>
Hmmm... ain't that something? Coming from VFP which is arguably the most 'ridiculed' language ever, then going to VB and still not getting any satisfaction. Isn't that ironic, John?
>

Perhaps it is...


>Screw it, man! Why do you care so much what other people think? If you think it's the right choice then it probably is the right choice for you! Go with it...
>

First off, I don't care what other people think. After all of these years, you should know that. My point is simple, I see a marketing message taking an unreasonable technical spin. I merely questioned the author. It is not the first time I have questioned the technical merits of the author. And like that time, I have gone on record to give another point of view. If people don't want opposing points of view, they should not open the door in a public forum.


>Nobody here in this discussion has even hinted at the inferiority of VB because there really isn't any. But with VFP folks specifically you gotta remember there's a lot of animosity towards VB because of the rivalry of the past. Also, there are probably an equal share of people who never used VB, but *did* use C++ in the past whether in old jobs or even from schooling way back in classes/school/college etc...
>

I have always viewed the "rivalry" as a rather juvenile thing...


>I have my prejudices and I've stated as much. Being able to read VB.NET is good enough for me, but given a choice I won't touch it to write code. That's pure preference...
>

Unlike you most, you go on record, your honest, and as usual, you have reasonble technical arguments to back up your position. And when it comes time to stand and defend the point of view that you offer, you are there. It is one of the things I have always respected about you. I have not always agreed with you, but nonetheless, the arguments were reasonable and have merit.

Regards,