 Visual Basic .NET 2003 Language Changes
started 3/23/2003; 8:03:35 AM - last post 3/24/2003; 7:07:15 AM
|
|
Dan Shappir - Visual Basic .NET 2003 Language Changes 
3/23/2003; 8:03:35 AM (reads: 1799, responses: 4)
|
|
| Visual Basic .NET 2003 Language Changes |
|
Apparently suffering from language envy, VB.NET embraces two C++ features: loop scoped control variables and bitshift operators. Loop scoped control variables let you replace the following charming syntax:
Dim counter As Integer
For counter = 0 To 10
Console.WriteLine(counter)
Next
with:
For counter As Integer = 0 To 10
Console.WriteLine(counter)
Next
with the added benefit that counter is only scoped for the loop block. This extension also works for For Each loops.
Language evolution in action! (why isn't there a VB category on LtU?)
Posted to general by Dan Shappir on 3/23/03; 8:16:36 AM
|
|
|
|
Ehud Lamm - Re: Visual Basic .NET 2003 Language Changes
3/23/2003; 10:33:52 AM (reads: 746, responses: 2)
|
|
|
I want LtU to deal with language features that are of general interest, and not with specific languages. Thus, we don't have categories for specific languages. The exception is Python. The Python category was mainly an experiment, that led me to believe that the original approach is correct.
Perhaps, however, there's room for a category dedicated to languages and language constructs related to RAD. In the mean time, the Software-Eng department is the closest fit.
|
|
James Hague - Re: Visual Basic .NET 2003 Language Changes
3/24/2003; 7:07:15 AM (reads: 633, responses: 0)
|
|
|
It isn't C++ that the features are borrwed from, but C#. It appears that a number of VB programmers are up in arms over VB essentially be turned into C# with a slightly different syntax.
|
|
Dan Shappir - Re: Visual Basic .NET 2003 Language Changes
3/24/2003; 11:22:18 AM (reads: 647, responses: 1)
|
|
|
Note to self: must work on humor. Ehud, that was supposed to be tong-in-cheek ;-)
|
|
Ehud Lamm - Re: Visual Basic .NET 2003 Language Changes
3/24/2003; 12:50:43 PM (reads: 674, responses: 0)
|
|
|
Oops...
|
|
|
|