From: C on
On 26 syys, 20:04, "J.B. Moreno" <pl...(a)newsreaders.com> wrote:
>  <wrong.addres...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> -snip-
>
> > I am in a similar situation, except that the decision is made: VB.net
> > will be used in future.
>
> > Over the last 14 years, thousands of lines of VB3-6 code has been
> > written, almost all of which is in use. I wonder how long it could
> > take to recode and not convert all of that. I cannot work full time as
> > a programmer. On the other hand, most of my VB6 code is relatively
> > simple - no databases, no communications with other programs or too
> > many APIs. There is just graphics, mostly plots of 4 kinds. Is
> > recoding a feasible option? Any estimate on how many weeks, months or
> > years it could take me? I wonder how many months it will take me to
> > learn "enough" of VB.net.
>
> Well, my experience has been that upgrading to .Net is not only
> feasible, but relatively straightforward.  I've done two apps, one with
> just a single form, and one with a couple of dozen.
>
> Biggest problem has been third party tools and some database type
> conversion issues.
>
> Not having done anything with plots, I can't speak to that.
>
> As for learning "enough" of VB.net it's less "VB" and more ".net" as in
> the .Net Framework.  While that's a large area, most of it you probably
> won't need or need to learn.
>
> I'd say go for it.
>
> --
> J.B. Moreno

I am already able to replace the code for plotting, but I am now
wondering if the whole thing should be redone instead of converting. A
lot of mathematics (subroutines with only calculations; at the most
Text1.Text = temperature) will remain the same.
From: Nobody on
"C" <wrong.address.1(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
news:0deb3ba7-9af8-4eef-85bb-e86fb18bbc4e(a)f33g2000vbm.googlegroups.com...
> Over the last 14 years, thousands of lines of VB3-6 code has been
> written, almost all of which is in use. I wonder how long it could
> take to recode and not convert all of that.

Some of the options available is KBasic. It's is similar to features to
VB.Net, but 100% VB6 code compatible, according to the author. It's open
source, and written in VC++ 2008. It uses Qt as GUI toolkit, and compiled
code runs on Windows/Linux/Mac. I haven't tried it myself, so you may want
to check it out:

http://www.kbasic.com
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qt_toolkit


From: J.B. Moreno on
<wrong.address.1(a)gmail.com> wrote:

> On 26 syys, 20:04, "J.B. Moreno" <pl...(a)newsreaders.com> wrote:
> > �<wrong.addres...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > -snip-
> >
> > > I am in a similar situation, except that the decision is made: VB.net
> > > will be used in future.
> >
> > > Over the last 14 years, thousands of lines of VB3-6 code has been
> > > written, almost all of which is in use. I wonder how long it could
> > > take to recode and not convert all of that. I cannot work full time as
-snip-
> > Well, my experience has been that upgrading to .Net is not only
> > feasible, but relatively straightforward. �I've done two apps, one with
> > just a single form, and one with a couple of dozen.
-snip-
> I am already able to replace the code for plotting, but I am now
> wondering if the whole thing should be redone instead of converting. A
> lot of mathematics (subroutines with only calculations; at the most
> Text1.Text = temperature) will remain the same.

I'd say give it a try and see how it goes -- don't be afraid of a lot
of errors to begin with, try fixing them and see where it goes.
There's probably only going to be a few basic types and fixing the
various instances one of the other (once you've figured it out) is
little more than typing (or even search and replace).

Before doing the conversion, it's recommended that you go through and
do what you can to make the conversion go more smoothly (again this is
mainly a lot of typing), in particular make sure that you've used a
declared type where ever possible and that parameters are declared as
ByVal unless they really need to be ByRef. The best thing about this
is that if you decide to stick with VB6, you've just cleaned up your
code a bit.

--
J.B. Moreno
From: C on
On 26 syys, 23:03, "Nobody" <nob...(a)nobody.com> wrote:
> "C" <wrong.addres...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:0deb3ba7-9af8-4eef-85bb-e86fb18bbc4e(a)f33g2000vbm.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Over the last 14 years, thousands of lines of VB3-6 code has been
> > written, almost all of which is in use. I wonder how long it could
> > take to recode and not convert all of that.
>
> Some of the options available is KBasic. It's is similar to features to
> VB.Net, but 100% VB6 code compatible, according to the author. It's open
> source, and written in VC++ 2008. It uses Qt as GUI toolkit, and compiled
> code runs on Windows/Linux/Mac. I haven't tried it myself, so you may want
> to check it out:
>
> http://www.kbasic.comhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qt_toolkit

I have checked various clones and none of them are 100% compatible. I
think it was in K Basic that you have declare every control object
manually and give it a number. Jabaco is one of the nicer options but
not very compatible with VB6.

I have to learn VB.net. That is decided. I can still decide to convert
the old codes or redesign and recode some of them. I am inclined to
learning for another few months with trial and error before starting
recoding.
From: Kevin Provance on


| > Despite what others say, if you want at the end a
| > program that is 10 times faster then VB6 (what is
| > possible with VB for Net) . . .
|
| Put your money where your mouth is fatty. And change that picture on your
| MVP profile. You look like a child molester with his head on upside down.

..Nxt faster than VB6? LMAO!!!

I have to agree with Mike, what would know about speed waddling the way you
must.


First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6
Prev: Capture month change
Next: Control arrays and FormN.Label31