Is there a way to convert a .TIF file in VB6
in [Visual Basic]
|
From: mayayana on 2 Mar 2010 09:36 > Your solution, on the other hand, requires him to > purchase some current version of VB.NET Aha! But the Express version is free. He doesn't have to buy it. Told you so. Told you so. ;) Sincerely, Paul, MVP (Newsgroup Marketing) ;) ~~~---~~~---~~~---~~~---~~~
From: Paul Clement on 2 Mar 2010 10:52 On Tue, 2 Mar 2010 01:18:26 -0500, "Rick Rothstein" <rick.newsNO.SPAM(a)NO.SPAMverizon.net> wrote: � Come on Paul... seriously... do you REALLY believe that giving a VB.NET � interop solution is in keeping with what the OP was looking for? Really? � Since VB6 provides a Declare statement so that API functions can be � incorporated into a VB6, I would say that Mike's (mscir) solution is a � totally valid response to the OP's question. I would also say that Shotgun � Thom's solution (adding the Microsoft provided DLL) is also a totally valid � response to the OP's question as adding DLL's to VB6 is not that foreign a � concept. Why them and not your VB.NET solution? Because they both allow the � OP to implement a solution using his existing copy of VB6 (which is what he � asked to be able to do). Your solution, on the other hand, requires him to � purchase some current version of VB.NET and then follow that up by spending � who knows how much time learning how to become accustomed to the differing � environments before becoming comfortable enough to try and implement your � approach. I honestly think you are grasping at straws here trying to defend � your original entry into this thread. Rick I'm just offering it as an option and I think that's fair. I don't see any reason why I have to defend something that developer's work with every day. In any event, pretty much any decent Classic Visual Basic developer can use a freely available copy of Visual Basic Express to build a .NET DLL. I mean, if you can understand and implement the GDI API functions is learning the Visual Basic .NET somehow more difficult? I don't have any issues with the other suggestions. They are all valid options. But some developers find using the Windows API confusing, because some understanding of the implementation (as in the case of GDI) is involved. But I don't think the fact that you have to learn something new should be a barrier to choosing a solution. That is, unless you just want someone to write the code for you and don't really care how it works. Paul ~~~~ Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)
From: Paul Clement on 2 Mar 2010 10:53 On Tue, 2 Mar 2010 09:36:08 -0500, "mayayana" <mayayana(a)nospam.invalid> wrote: � � > Your solution, on the other hand, requires him to � > purchase some current version of VB.NET � � Aha! But the Express version is free. He doesn't � have to buy it. Told you so. Told you so. ;) � � Sincerely, � � Paul, MVP (Newsgroup Marketing) ;) � ~~~---~~~---~~~---~~~---~~~ LOL! Good one! Paul ~~~~ Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)
From: Paul Clement on 2 Mar 2010 11:04 On Tue, 2 Mar 2010 08:18:38 -0000, "Mike Williams" <Mike(a)WhiskyAndCoke.com> wrote: � > Denying others choice is the work of a selfish, angry � > and bitter man. Don't be one. :-) � � Now you really are proving that you are an idiot as well as a troll. The OP � did NOT ask for suggestions regarding a choice of alternative development � environment. He asked for a solution that he could implement in VB6. Nobody � denied him anything, except of course yourself who denied him a real answer � to his question and who instead suggested that he should move elsewhere. � � If you really do think that failing to offer a choice of development � environments in answer to a question regarding a specific development � environment is "denying others choice", especially when a solution using his � existing development environment is available, then you are even more of an � idiot that I thought, and if you do not really think that then you are a � liar, And, of course, you are clearly a troll. So there you have it. Liar � and troll or idiot and troll, one or the other. � � I have known for some time that you are a troll, but I never had you down as � an idiot so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and put you down as a � liar. The sad thing is that with the breadth of knowledge that you obviously � have (except regarding the OP's specific question of course, where your � knowledge was clearly limited) you could have been a really useful member of � this group. How sad that it has not turned out that way. � � Mike � Well I hope you feel better now that you have established a classification for me. It's just information Mike. No reason to fear it or be intolerant of it or those who deliver it. No one is perfect, no one is always right or wrong and how you interact with others, with respect to what you believe their shortcomings to be, is a reflection of who you are. As usual I appreciate your opinions despite the fact that I don't agree with them. :-) Paul ~~~~ Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic)
From: Rick Rothstein on 2 Mar 2010 11:51
> Rick I'm just offering it as an option and I think that's fair. I don't > see any > reason why I have to defend something that developer's work with every > day. The real problem I have with this justification is that anyone using any language can make the same offering as you did... just replace VB.NET with Java, Delphi.NET, C++, RealBASIC, PowerBASIC, etc., etc. If you think it is right to do, then advocates of these other languages would be entitled to feel the same way. If they chose to do as you did, do you really think a mass offering of your type of response from advocates of these other languages would help the OP get the VB6 solution he sought? If they chose to make their offerings in response to questions as frequently as the various VB.NET advocates (such as yourself) do, do you think that would be a good thing for the "health and welfare" of this particular newsgroup for its established purpose (to answer VB Classic questions)? Before you answer, think what your (and the other VB.NET regulars') reaction would be to a C++ and/or Delph.NET advocate continually jumping into the VB.NET newsgroups tell every person posting a question that their language could do a better job solving the posed problem. I'm pretty sure you and the other VB.NET regulars would become kind of annoyed at the continual intrusions... kind of how the regulars here feel about the continual VB.NET advocate's intrusions into this newsgroup. > In any event, pretty much any decent Classic Visual Basic developer can > use a freely available copy of Visual Basic Express to build a .NET DLL I'm not familiar with the various "flavors" of VB.NET... does the Express version have any major limitations as compared to a full-blown copy of VB.NET (pro? enterprise? whatever?)? Will someone moving from VB6 Pro to Visual Basic Express be giving up some functionality they presently have access to in VB6? I wouldn't think one would invest the time and effort in learning Visual Basic Express just to do a single application; rather, it would be with an eye to moving into VB.NET permanently, so the question of functionality loss (if any) seems valid in this case. -- Rick (MVP - Excel) "Paul Clement" <UseAdddressAtEndofMessage(a)swspectrum.com> wrote in message news:e1cqo5pbf0pvcv2l71a5j5sum1tbrb00ur(a)4ax.com... > On Tue, 2 Mar 2010 01:18:26 -0500, "Rick Rothstein" > <rick.newsNO.SPAM(a)NO.SPAMverizon.net> wrote: > > � Come on Paul... seriously... do you REALLY believe that giving a VB.NET > � interop solution is in keeping with what the OP was looking for? Really? > � Since VB6 provides a Declare statement so that API functions can be > � incorporated into a VB6, I would say that Mike's (mscir) solution is a > � totally valid response to the OP's question. I would also say that > Shotgun > � Thom's solution (adding the Microsoft provided DLL) is also a totally > valid > � response to the OP's question as adding DLL's to VB6 is not that foreign > a > � concept. Why them and not your VB.NET solution? Because they both allow > the > � OP to implement a solution using his existing copy of VB6 (which is what > he > � asked to be able to do). Your solution, on the other hand, requires him > to > � purchase some current version of VB.NET and then follow that up by > spending > � who knows how much time learning how to become accustomed to the > differing > � environments before becoming comfortable enough to try and implement > your > � approach. I honestly think you are grasping at straws here trying to > defend > � your original entry into this thread. > > Rick I'm just offering it as an option and I think that's fair. I don't > see any > reason why I have to defend something that developer's work with every > day. In > any event, pretty much any decent Classic Visual Basic developer can use a > freely available copy of Visual Basic Express to build a .NET DLL. I mean, > if > you can understand and implement the GDI API functions is learning the > Visual > Basic .NET somehow more difficult? > > I don't have any issues with the other suggestions. They are all valid > options. > But some developers find using the Windows API confusing, because some > understanding of the implementation (as in the case of GDI) is involved. > But I > don't think the fact that you have to learn something new should be a > barrier to > choosing a solution. That is, unless you just want someone to write the > code for > you and don't really care how it works. > > Paul > ~~~~ > Microsoft MVP (Visual Basic) |