Talk:Visual Basic (classic)/Archive 2

Popularity
"it currently competes with C++ and JavaScript as the third most popular programming language behind C# and Java."

Doubtful. The article referenced is almost 2 years old. More recent data suggest otherwise:

http://www.tiobe.com/tpci.htm

--200.59.173.14 19:43, 15 March 2007 (UTC)


 * My guess is that we could find a number of articles that would rank languages differently, but I agree that the more recent article should take precedent, and we should probably add a date to the statement. wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 22:54, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

NEXTSTEP?
There's no mention of the NEXTSTEP Interface Builder... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.210.16.80 (talk) 00:34, 2 April 2007 (UTC).

Pros/Cons of VB compared to other languages
Does anyone have a link to a good comparison of VB to other languages? Of course the general consensus is that VB is not suited for enterprise use (although used anyway), but I would like to have solid proof before adding it to this article. I haven't been able to find a good comparision besides my own opinion of the language. -- Xandell 04:49, 21 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure if anyone's actually written up a comprehensive comparison, but one place to look around might be in some of the MVP areas, with particular attention to issues with distributed code. From what I understand, the most significant issues with VB (relative to less restricted languages) lie in some of the finer points of using COM. Just about anything else is supported in one way or another or can be farmed out to a dll in another language. --Mr Wednesday 23:38, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

External VB6 link
Hello Angelo Cruz, I just tried to add a link to an external site that I think is very helpful. The site currently and will always deal only with Visual Basic 6 information. Many VB6 sites are not up to date or don't even exist any more once VB.NET was realeased. However, like this wiki discribes many business still use VB6 heavily. This site is for those business. I am wondering what needs to be done in order for this site to be considered a valuable asset to the VB community? As it was immediatly removed from the external links section when I added it. I hope this makes sense - I am not trying to be a pain or annoy anyone, so if I am missing something please let me know. The link is vb6.us.

Thanks, Mjwest10 20:38, 20 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm the one that reverted your edit. The main reasons were:


 * There is already a long list of sites. Wikipedia is not a list of links
 * There was no comment to go along with the edit
 * I seem to recall that link was added a while ago and got reverted. (I tried to go back and find that, but I just tried to find that, but couldn't.) wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 02:05, 21 February 2007 (UTC)


 * That makes sense, except for I think even though there is a long list of VB6 sites some of them are not nearly as useful as the vb6.us website. For example the Visual Basic Sample files link goes to http://undim.blogspot.com/ - this is a BLOG that has only three posts on it and a bunch of ads. Another example is the ABOUT.com site - it goes to a page that only has a few VB.NET samples - seems to be much better placed on the VB.NET Wiki page. Another one is the Beginner Visual Basic 6 tutorials (http://aphnetworks.com/tutorials) this link goes to a page that has a bunch of tutorials related to PHP, windows tips, and other things and only a few Visual Basic related material. This website is of some use, but it seems like a site committed only to VB6 would be a good link to have. This is why I added it, but I didn't think about the fact that I should have commented along with it - sorry about that. Would it be appropriate for me to replace the visualbasic.about.com link with the www.vb6.us link? Please let me know.
 * Thanks, Mjwest10 16:02, 21 February 2007 (UTC)


 * As a side note - I just noticed the last link on the page (vbaccelerator) is simply a link to a bunch of advertisements.
 * Mjwest10 16:07, 21 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Why don't you delete the references which you think aren't appropriate, since you spotted them? (It is easier to get forgiveness than permission. ;^)  If you can get the list down far enough, then adding vb6.us won't be such a deal.  Make sure you explain your edit!
 * BTW - you should use colons to indent each new thread. This helps people keep straight who said what when. ;^) wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 16:49, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Sounds good - While we've been talking - two more links have been added. I am going to remove those new ones and go through and figure out any dead/useless links. Thanks for all your help and patience.
 * Just updated the external links - I removed any dead links, ones that were not directly VB6 related, or ones that were specific to one tutorial - for example a tutorial that explained how to create a hash tree in VB. Now we have room to include other VB6 tutorial sites - but I would recommend people discuss them first - to make sure its not just a site that is a bunch of ads. Does this seem reasonable? Mjwest10 18:52, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mjwest10 (talk • contribs) 18:15, 21 February 2007 (UTC).


 * I added a comment to the Tutorial section of the article suggesting they discuss any additions on the talk page before adding anything. That way, if anyone adds an entry, especially without any comment, it can be reverted right away.
 * You're getting the hang of Wikipedia. Great job!  Now, remember to sign your posts on the talk pages with four tildes ( ~ ) wrp103 (Bill Pringle) 19:47, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

--200.59.173.14 19:43, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

D.cr59 22:08, 7 May 2007 (UTC)d.cr59 The MS VB6 syntax, not documented much (not at all to say the truth!!), is available here VB6 Complete Syntax. Excuse me for my unusual action yesterday..

Adding VB Project Files
I personally feel that we should add .vbp files or forms or modules for people to see. Are we allowed to do that?

--Drnoitall.hello 00:15, 9 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't think that is a good idea. Those files are created by the tools, so seeing what they look like doesn't really help them to do anything. wrp103 (Bill Pringle)  (Talk) 03:06, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

I see. It was just a thought.--Drnoitall.hello 08:53, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Disambiguation: VB = Victoria Bitter
In Australia, it is very common to refer to Victoria Bitter as VB. wikipedia.org/VB redirects here. Would it be appropriate to add a link to (if you meant Victoria Bitter...) at the top of this page? Mikel Ward 08:20, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't see the redirect, VB is a disambiguation page and Victoria Butter is already listed there. &mdash; O cat ecir  Talk  20:34, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Links
I have removed the tutorials per the discussion on WT:EL. I have replaced them with a link to Dmoz which is much more comprehensive and removes the need for us to make decisions about external links in this way.-Localzuk(talk) 16:46, 14 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you! I've been trying to keep trolls from adding links to spam sites.  It looks like a couple crept in while I wasn't looking. :-( -- wrp103 (Bill Pringle)  (Talk) 16:58, 14 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Edit protection has been added after I filed a AIV. Please keep an eye out for this spam on other VB related articles, use uw-spam3 or uw-spam4 when you revert it, and report back here if it occurs on other pages.  We may need to add these three URLs to the Spam blacklist. John Vandenberg 14:38, 16 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I have a question about this latest addition. A while back I cleaned up the links area of this section. I feel I made it pretty valuable. Part of why people come to wikipedia is to spring board to relevant sites. I understand the DMOZ plan, but part of the problem we run into with Visual Basic 6 is that most sites that were Visual Basic 6 related are now VB.NET and its hard for people to find any good VB6 information. To be completely forthcoming, part of the reason I take such an interest in this is that I have created a site devoted to only VB6 content. I feel it is a great site and a great resource. I don't sell anything on it and the only advertisement is a few google adsense ads to help fund my efforts to host and maintain it. I would love to hear other people's view on my comments and see if there is any way to have my site listed again. I don't wish to spam the article or have my site listed if people don't think its valuable. Let me know, thanks.

Mjwest10 16:01, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * The problem is that Wikipedia isn't a link directory - we are here to present an analysis and provide sources. External links are an extra and as this is a subject area where there will be so many sites out there, keeping the links trimmed will be a constant job. It is better to stick to the dmoz link. If you feel that the dmoz category doesn't do the job, remember that that is a user submission/edited site also. The main thing is that external links have to comply with our rules, and the ones I removed didn't. Finally, posting a link to your own site would be completely unacceptable due to our rules regarding conflict of interest, notability and authority. -Localzuk(talk) 17:32, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Thats unfortunate to hear. I understand that the DMOZ is a user submission/edited site as well and I am working to get it to include links to visual basic classic information but unfortunately its a slow process. On the other hand I already went through the process of petitioning the group here at wikipedia to include my site and people felt it was a useful and worthwhile site. That is why it was added. It was not spam or a junk site. I understand the rules regarding conflict of interest, notability and authority - that is why I discussed the site here first. It was approved by the discussion community before it was added. Can you explain to me how the vb6.us site did not comply with the rules? Thanks in advance. Mjwest10 21:00, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, the site doesn't show its notability and it doesn't show how it is an authority on the subject matter. It is also a personal site.-Localzuk(talk) 21:07, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

i think this article should be renamed to visual basic (not in visual studio .net —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.49.212.45 (talk • contribs).

Other MS Basic
I think a discussion of the relationship to Excel Basic and Access Basic would be interesting, if anyone knows anything. For example, the VB varient is apparently based on an Excel XLOPR, VB dates are Excel (Lotus 123 compatible) dates, Access Basic was developed in parallel with VB and there must have been some overlap, because its the same language with a different forms engine etc. Also, VB was clearly a MSBASIC compatible VB: was there any code overlap? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.101.166.15 (talk) 06:30, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

VBScript?
A recent edit tried to introduce VBScript into the context of the language preference poll. The way that it was done left a sentence that didn't make a whole lot of sense, so I reverted the change. I'm curious, though, about whether VBScript makes up a significant portion of the reported percentage. If it does, that information should be worked in somehow. --Mr Wednesday 02:18, 5 June 2007 (UTC)


 * The problem I have with this is that VB and VBScript are different languages. It is like claiming that Java and Javascript are the same language. -- wrp103 (Bill Pringle)  (Talk) 04:08, 5 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I know that, but I think it's possible that such nuance might get lost in a large survey. --Mr Wednesday 20:29, 5 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes I made the original edit. I agree in retrospect that it came off clumsy... I tried to keep the original reference intact and add in VBScript.  I think that it is unusual that VBScript is not referenced somewhere in the heading as it is a big source of confusion for me (diff of VB vs. VBScript).  Thanks for bringing up the discussion.  My desire is to somehow mention the role of scripting (JavaScript, VBScript) in a web environment and that VBScript is the other major scripting language.  Although VB and VBS are different languages, the difference should be linked in somehow; Explanation can follow as an article heading, but discriminatory mention should be in the header. // Brick Thrower 04:10, 6 June 2007 (UTC)


 * They are entirely different languages. Although syntactically similar, there are many subtle differences that can cause you to get burned if you think of  VBScript as a form of VB.


 * For example, VBScript doesn't handle shortcut evaluation while VB does. So the lines:

IF I>0 and TBL(I)>0 THEN X=y END IF
 * Will execute differently. VBScript will generate a runtime error if I is negative.


 * Likewise:

S="ABC" S = S & "DEF" S = S & "GHI"
 * Is common practice in VB, but will cause major problems if used on ASP pages. This is because strings are handled differently by the two languages.  The above code will cause significant overhead for VBScript.
 * Not exactly that Strings are handled differently, any more than Integers are: they aren't. But compilation is handled differently. In VB6 the code S=1: S=S+1: S=S+1 would be compiled as S=3 (VB6 used the Visual Studio compiler). Since VBS does not do the optimisation step, manifest constants are handled differently, and will cause significant overhead.150.101.166.15 05:24, 25 September 2007 (UTC)


 * There are probably a number of sites that list the differences. We got burned pretty bad once when writing an early ASP application.  We couldn't figure out why it was running so slow until we read the fine print. :-( -- wrp103 (Bill Pringle)  (Talk) 04:57, 6 June 2007 (UTC)


 * This was the point of my original edit. I am discovering things like your examples also. Your differences should be explained somewhere in the body of the article (sub heading VB vs. VBScript?) but I wanted some sort of link to VBScript in the main header of this article that could tip the initial browsing user (like me) to the (possibly) appropriate article on VBScript.  Just the confusion in the names alone warrants mention in the heading, but I am not sure how to do that.  Right now VBScript is only first mentioned in the second heading of the article.  // Brick Thrower 06:37, 6 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Last I knew, VB does not have shortcut evaluation, hence the futzing around related to it with VB.NET where they first changed the semantics of the And and Or operators, and then backtracked and added new shortcut operators. Two observations: First, this is a natural progression of the lack of boolean logic in the language, x And y is an arithmatic expression; second, the order of evaluation of the members of an expression is unspecified, and you can get nasty Heisenbugs if side effects in one part of an expression affect the evaluation of the other (having been bitten by same in production code). --Mr Wednesday 16:47, 14 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I've cut "(namely inefficient string concatenation and absence of short-cut evaluation)" VB was notorious for ineffecient string concatenation, but you can put that back if you think you know better. The remark about short-cut evaluation was just wrong: Use the case statement in VB to get short-cut evaluation, because the If statement doesn't do that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.101.166.15 (talk) 07:03, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Differences in string handling?
One of the footnotes states, "For example: S="ABC" : S = S & "DEF" : S = S & "GHI" is common practice in VB, but will cause major problems if used on ASP pages. This is because strings are handled differently by the two languages. The above code will cause significant overhead for VBScript."

What are the differences that are referenced? I know, for example, that VB's string handling can result in pretty substantial memory overhead, and I believe that it's mainly done using the underlying Windows BString facilities. --Mr Wednesday 19:17, 10 August 2007 (UTC)


 * VBScript creates a new string for each append operation, which generates a lot of overhead. This is similar to using String instead of StringBuffer in Java. -- wrp103 (Bill Pringle)  (Talk) 22:16, 10 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure if VB does exactly the same thing, but I know that the performance and/or memory usage in a string concatenation in VB is suboptimal &mdash; I've tested it myself. I wouldn't be surprised if this is a shared misfeature, rather than purely a VBScript issue. --Mr Wednesday 20:09, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * It's a difference in the way compilation is handled -- not in the way strings are handled. VB6 would do the concatination at compilation: VBS does the concatination at run time. If you use string variables instead of string constants the behaviour is the same.150.101.166.15 05:32, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Controversy section
I pruned most of the controversy in this edit. The previous version can be seen here. This section had been tagged for cleanup since May 2006 and was almost entirely unsourced. It also compromised a major portion of the article. I believe that my edit helped to focus the article on the language itself rather than various opinions about the language's strenghts or weaknesses. If a controversy section is necessary, statements obviously need to be attributed and reliably sourced. ChazBeckett 02:10, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Visual Basic permits something like this: A = 10 B = "20" C = A + B

Isn't this "Weak Typing"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.133.215.2 (talk) 17:26, 9 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes, it is (but not to be confused with dynamic typing). -- int19h 06:32, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Performance and other issues section
The second paragraph in this section is problematic. Firstly, the writer does not appear to understand the VB object system because it talks about difficulty understanding when a copy of an object is created. This is not difficult to understand at all &mdash; unless you explicitly ask for a copy of an object to be created, you get a new reference (modulo any differences arising in remote automation, which is something I'm not all that familiar with).

If the discussion of objects is corrected, the paragraph becomes disjoint. The first sentence talks about "poor memory management" and "non-standard programming constructs". But nothing that follows presents a real issue with poor memory management (in fact, I'm not convinced there's any evidence of VB having memory management issues aside from GUI objects and large string modification) nor with non-standard programming constructs.

In my mind, the only serious discussion that can be had about performance revolves around two things: the built-in GUI objects don't always perform as cleanly as similar design would in a C++ application, and the compiler sometimes produces suboptimal code for computation-intensive bits, which I presume is driven mainly by imposition of the VB error-handling model. (There are some specific constructs that VB generates particularly poor code for, in particular I think GoSub/Return, but that's not something that's going to affect the average programmer.) --Mr Wednesday 22:16, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

derivitive languages, vbscript
"executed by the Windows Script Host as opposed to the VB runtime" No, vbscript is HOSTED by the Windows Script Host, like VBA is hosted by Excel or Word. 150.101.166.15 (talk) 03:22, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

"Here be monsters" and other old wives tales...
1. The introductory paragraph and "Language Features" section manages to ignore that VB is clearly an Object Oriented language, as opposed to an IDE for assembling visual components written in other langauges (which hasn't been true since VB4). The last sentence merely states that it 'has basic object oriented support'. VB6 has and supports user defined classes and class hierarchies and supports abstraction, encapsulation, and polymorphism via implementation inheritance, but somehow it doesn't qualify as an OO language. Please see... Talk:Comparison_of_programming_languages

2. The "Programming constructs not present in Visual Basic" section makes some strange points: -> VB lacks C++ & Java Error Handling. Should read: try, catch, and finally blocks (found in many languages) which can be implemented in VB if you wish. (You can actually implement a version of error handling that is far more consistent with the principles of OOP (such as a customized Err object that catches error events) than a glorified GoTo struture like "On Error" or "try catch finally".

3. If there is any doubt as to whether VB6 competes for dominance in the business world, (the cited graph from Aug. 2007 now refutes the doubter that cited it) surely we must wonder about Javascript (this must be a proxy for web-based applications, because I'm sure a lot more web development is done with server side PHP AND ECMAscript than just Netscape's proprietary version of it), and the lack of C (embedded systems aside, C still attracts an out-sized portion of projects by every survey I've ever seen, including the cited table.)


 * Keep in mind the TIOBE graph merges VB6 and VB.NET —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.59.173.14 (talk) 15:58, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

4. The deleted "Controversy" section speaks to the article's bias which is more apparently more difficult to purge than the assemblage of VB old wives tails found within:

- Anybody that would complain about creating a new variable with a typo (because they didn't use Option Explicit) doesn't deserve to be considered a VB programmer. Do people judge C as controversial because newbie C developers sometimes type x=100 when they meant x==100?

- VB has a whole 2MB runtime (actually I think the VB6 runtime is closer to 8MB). The .Net framework is at least 20+ MB's. How about a JVM?

- VB has a reputation for poor performance? Compared to what - C? Try some business domain typical operations like complex string handling or DB recordset manipulation and then compare that with Java's string handling or DB operations via JDBC. How about memory consumption? How many Java apps run in less than 50MB's? .Net?

- How about development time for a typical OLAP business application? (Compare against Java or .Net) The only reason a VB program would suffer from poor performance is because the programmer should have taken the opportunity to seek another profession. I'm sure many people have seen similar travesties in SQL or (insert language here), but we don't hear anyone complaining that SQL or (insert langauge here) is slow. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.115.200.62 (talk) 18:24, August 26, 2007 (UTC)


 * Regarding point 2, I'm responsible for the way that text is currently worded. I'm fluent in VB and fluent in C++ as well, though a little out-of-practice with both as my current work involves mainly Fortran.  The text that I replaced claimed that VB does not have exception handling at all, which is clearly false as the On Error facility is a form of exception handling.  However, the form and capabilities are not identical to C++ and Java, which I considered to be common frames of reference.  Perhaps it would be better to simply state that it does not have a try-catch format, or delete the bit altogether.


 * I've never really felt compelled to do some sort of custom error object in VB. As long as you're working with only in-house components, error number plus description have always been adequate to my needs.  The only real issue comes in when you start tacking on additional components with their own error numbers.


 * I don't see the point to discussing the deleted controversy section. It's deleted, after all.  You certainly don't seem to want to resurrect it, so let's focus on any improvements that may need to be made to the existing text.
 * --Mr Wednesday 20:18, 30 August 2007 (UTC)


 * First off, I would encourage you (208.115.200.62) to create a user account.


 * As for point #1, I believe that you can only extend your own classes; you can't extend the Microsoft base classes.


 * I also agree with you on point #2, and suggest that you make the change. (Preferably after you create a user account. ;^)


 * I'm not sure of your point for #3. Do you believe the article questions that VB competes with the other languages listed?


 * As for #4, I agree with your assertion that anyone who doesn't use "Option Explicit" shouldn't be considered a VB programmer. Unfortunately, I have seen a number of VB programs that our company paid good money for that not only didn't use Option Explicit, but generated all kinds of errors when it was added.  But, as Mr. Wednesday said, that section is already deleted, so we can ignore it.


 * Once again, I would encourage you to get an account. I hate to see good editors stay anonymous. -- wrp103 (Bill Pringle)  (Talk) 08:59, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Visual Basic is limited to unsigned 8-bit integers and signed integers of 16 and 32 bits.
Idea that Currency "can be be accurately used in place of Integers" seems odd: I think it was more common to use DOUBLE in place of large integers. That's only a 48 bit integer, (Currency is 64), but it was easier to use, and most importantly, it was around long before Currency turned up. 150.101.166.15 05:50, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * When dealing with currency, I don't think you would ever want to use any form of floating point numbers because of roundoff problems. -- wrp103 (Bill Pringle) (Talk) 15:50, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * It was common to use double for currency: Lots of financial applications were written in VB3. The important thing was to be compatible with Excel, which used doubles. The currency type was introduced because people did not ever want to use any form of floating point numbers, but here's the thing: 10 years in finance programming (1995-2005) and I never saw a VB/VBA/Excel program using the currency type, only double. But that's not the point I was raising: I was talking about large integers. Something like this:
 * "the type DOUBLE was commonly used when larger integers were required"150.101.166.15 (talk) 02:37, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

What is Dim short for?
Luxophage 16:13, 8 June 2007 (UTC)


 * It is short for "Dimension". The original version of BASIC didn't require declaring an array, all you needed to do was write something like T(A%) and the interpreter would assume T was an array and create it with 8 cells.  If you wanted to have an array that was longer than 8, you needed to declare its dimension:

DIM T(12)
 * (Remember that originally variables were limited to a single letter, optionally followed by a single digit.) As the language evolved, a need arose for non-executable statements (REM was an executable statement, it just didn't do anything).  My guess is that somebody figured out they already had a non-executable statement and just adapted it for all declarations, not just array sizes.  There was no need for type declarations in the original BASIC - X was Float, X% was Integer, and X$ was String, and they were all separate variables, so you could have something like: X=X%*1.5. -- wrp103 (Bill Pringle)  (Talk) 16:31, 8 June 2007 (UTC)


 * It's also similar to old-style Fortran (before the advent of IMPLICIT NONE), where you get implicitly-typed scalars without a declaration statement but need to use a DIMENSION declaration to create an array. I harp on this a lot, but there are quite a number of similarities between the languages (including the IDE understanding the Fortran form for declaring a double-precision constant, something that I doubt more than a handful of people know).  It's too bad they let the Java zealots loose on .NET, people with a Fortran background might have had more appreciation for the existing language.


 * (I'll have to check and see if VB still counts the type declaration character as part of the name, I'm not sure if I realized that.) --Mr Wednesday 16:47, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * @and create it with 8 cells: Your assumption is flawed:

10 for i = 1 to 100 20 a(i) = i 30 print a(i) 40 next RUN 1 2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10 Subscript out of range in 20 Ok
 * You're welcome. Shinobu 05:21, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

It means Declare in Memory. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.134.164.46 (talk) 07:58, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

what is provider in vb?
what is provider in vb? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.106.167.10 (talk) 09:16, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Beginner classes
This article should not include tutorial examples. A wiki-books project, perhaps, but not here Christopher G Lewis (talk) 23:51, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Link Spam
In an attempt to combat link spam, I've added the substituted template {{subst:NoMoreLinks}} to the external links section as per Spam Christopher G Lewis (talk) 21:03, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks Christopher, What exactly does that mean? How did you add it? and how do you decide where to add it? I am trying to learn more about all of this and I am trying to work hard at keeping a few pages clean and up to date. This one and a local Montana one. Any light you can shed on what your doing would help me a lot. If you have any articles or help sections you recommend I would greatly appreciate it.
 * Thanks, Mjwest10 (talk) 06:05, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Not really sure where I found it - I'm relatively new at this. Basically have spent two weeks removing crap links like this and am just starting to read the Wikipedia: pages.  I just hope it helps :-)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Christopher G Lewis (talk • contribs) 08:44, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

GUI Development in Visual Basic 6
THis section doesn't make much sense in the article. I propose we delete it. Christopher G Lewis (talk) 21:49, 18 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I would concur. Either we fix it up to not have POV and be more in depth or the section should simply be deleted.Mjwest10 (talk) 19:19, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Extended support has ended & runtime libraries
The first part of the article should be altered. I cannot remember where I found it, but Microsoft ended extended support for VB 6 in February, 2008.

Also, the runtime libraries for VB 6 are not included by default in Windows Vista.

I have made both of these changes to the article.

Evils Dark (talk) 04:31, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Deleted paragraph
Stating that Visual Basic 'competes' with other languages (such as C++, Java, C#...) in 'business programming 'does not make sense in the introduction of the article. Moreover, its reference is clearly wrong/outdated: Nowadays, the only VB-like language competing with some importance is VB.NET, which is enterely unrelated to VB 6.0 and earlier versions.

By far, C# and Java (just for example) have much more importance in 'business programming' than old Visual Basic. In general programming, Visual Basic 6.0 has nothing to do. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.183.248.25 (talk) 14:55, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

support
This article is all over the place as regards the termination of support. February 2008 is wrong, but it also mentions March 2008, which is also wrong.

The standard support ended in March 2005 and the extended support ended in April 2008. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.201.168.132 (talk) 10:45, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Remove Citations Needed Header
I added a source to verify the only "citation needed" area of the page a few weeks ago (I may not have been signed in). As there are now no "citation needed" statements in the document, should we remove the "improve this article" header? SoxSexSax (talk) 17:11, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Finding Prime numbers example
This is of relatively little importance, but I thought I'd mention it. The prime number example checks divisors up to half the number being checked. This is overkill. It should check up to the square root of the number being checked; this is typically a much smaller number and is sufficient to determine primality. For example, to check 100 for primality, it is sufficient to check for divisors up to sqrt(100)=10, as opposed to 100/2=50. An intuitive reason for this; the operation "/2" gives the "additive" half-way point of a number, but "sqrt" operation gives the "multiplicative" half-way point, and this calculation is more relevant to primality. If there were a divisor above ten (e.g. 20), it's counterpart would be below 10 (e.g. 5). Therefore checking to 10 instead of 50 would be sufficient and more efficient. Thanks for a great wiki though, reads well. Cheers! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.103.202.190 (talk) 19:29, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Restored lead section
I restored key material that was removed by from the lead section in the name of "simplification". You can't talk about VB without mentioning rapid application development, event driven programming, and the interoperability features - especially database access. Those are the features that made VB a success. Yes the section could be rewritten to make it easier for a novice to understand, but the material should not be deleted. (And no, I'm no Microsoft fan.) -- Tcncv (talk) 04:44, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Bankers Rounding
I added (using the Windows Library), because, although I didn't want to make the article longer, rounding is done by a Windows DLL, and as I recall it was a Windows upgrade that changed VB from schoolboy rounding to bankers rounding. If you don't like it, cut it back out again, I won't cry. 150.101.166.15 06:40, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I've cut it out again. Your assertion that a Windows DLL does the rounding is based on the assumption that VB's rounding changed due to a Windows upgrade. I have consulted the documentation for VB4 and this is not the case. This is not the same as saying that rouding is not done by a Windows DLL, but it has no place in the article until we a) know it's true and b) can provide a citation. Shinobu 05:16, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
 * http://www.vb-helper.com/howto_round_to_specified_digits.html
 * http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=321047
 * http://source.winehq.org/source/dlls/oleaut32/variant.c?v=wine20030408 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.101.166.15 (talk) 07:31, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Versions
Hasn't more versions of VB come out already? I mean... the Visual Basics.Net are more upgraded than VB6, and I dont think it is even the most updated version. Maybe parts of this article need to be completely re-written. D r y d o m Any thoughts? 02:08, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
 * There's a completely different product called Visual Basic .NET, but VB6 is the last version of the original Visual Basic. They are not the same product.  This has come up a number of times if you read through the preceding comments. —Geoff Riley (talk) 09:29, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
 * That's not entirely true: Visual Basic .NET has now been renamed to just "Visual Basic". -16:27, 5 December 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.72.173.51 (talk)

To
Sample Code —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.212.156.196 (talk) 19:24, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Proposed rename
See the discussion on the Visual Basic .NET'' talk page. -- Tcncv (talk) 02:19, 17 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Is there no interest in voicing an opinion one way or the other? Please add your comments to the talk page referenced above.  -- Tcncv (talk) 00:15, 29 December 2008 (UTC)


 * No consensus was reached on the original proposal. The proposal has been updated with an alternate plan.  Please see the discussion on the Visual Basic .NET'' talk page.  -- Tcncv (talk) 00:30, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Rename to Visual Basic (Classic)
Because MS has another product called VB now, and unless you rename your article, it will eventually just be replaced with something else. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.101.166.15 (talk) 07:05, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * No it won't. No name change is necessary, nor desirable. See Visual Basic .NET for the "other VB". Shinobu 05:09, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

I second the name change. Visual Basic is now part of the Visual Studio 2005 family. Visual Basic 6 and below are now antiquated and depreciated. Visual Basic should be renamed to Visual Basic 6, or Visual Basic (Classic), or Visual Basic (Legacy). Just because you may not like Visual Basic 2005 does not make these two pages names correct, in fact, Microsoft has dropped .NET from the name entirely since Visual Studio 2005. GuideX2 (talk) 22:59, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

I also think this would be a good name change. I came to this article expecting an article on all the versions of VB, from VB 1 to VB.net and beyond. At the very least I expected the article to be about the latest version of what Microsoft officially calls Visual Basic. Jackster (talk) 01:23, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Price?
Is this for free or what? Sorry if this is a stupid question. 87.146.1.158 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:44, 26 February 2009 (UTC).

Idea for another code example.
I would like to add an example for a vbYesNo message box to the Code Example section.

Source code below:

--Cheats (talk) 23:09, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

module Hello World example
---_ Private message As String Private greeting As String Private who As String Sub main greeting = "Hello" who = "World" message = greeting & " " & who & "!" MsgBox message, vbExclamation, "" End Sub

213.222.173.105 (talk) 10:49, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Being in mind that WP is not a manual, what would that illustrate that the current example does not?  Socrates2008 ( Talk )  11:14, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

This is a modul example not a form 213.222.173.105 (talk) 14:08, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Icon
I'm all for the Icon shown on the page about 2 thirds down, but it is a bit dated. An MS-DOS Visual Basic Icon that looks to be from pre-98/2000, most likely 1991-94. Should a more recent version be included too and am I right with the dates? 95jb14 (talk) 19:11, 3 December 2009 (UTC).


 * The icon does look different from what I recall (from fairly recent work with VB6). Perhaps it's for VB5.  The image description doesn't provide any useful information Tedickey (talk) 21:40, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

VB 2008 Released.
Someone needs to add the fact that Microsoft released VB 2008. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dockofusa (talk • contribs) 15:46, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
 * That's actually VB.NET 2008, a separate and incompatible successor to the classic VB series. 24.222.2.222 (talk) 14:46, 13 October 2009 (UTC)


 * oh. i see. thanks for the clarify! Dockofusa (talk) 01:02, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Merger proposal
I find two substantive reasons to merge Visual Basic with Visual Basic .NET.

The first is for encyclopedic clarity. Since Visual Basic 2005, and continuing with Visual Basic 2008 (and, conceivably, all versions from here on out), Microsoft has used the general "Visual Basic" name, as opposed to the name "Visual Basic .NET." Thus, readers looking for these versions would be apt to go to the page Visual Basic; there's no reason, IMHO, that anyone would go to the VB.NET page as opposed to the VB page when looking for VB 2005 and 2008, which are the most recent versions.

Second, leaving aside the arguments for and against MS's conversion to VB.NET from the traditional VB framework, the software is quite obviously similar. In fact, as the VB.NET page itself notes, "the version numbers used for the new Visual Basic (7, 7.1, 8, 9, ...) clearly imply that it is viewed by Microsoft as still essentially the same product as the old Visual Basic." Therefore, I find it intellectually dishonest to disassociate the "old" VB with VB.NET merely on the basis of the two names used after the transition.

Thus, I propose that Visual Basic .NET be merged into Visual Basic. - TheTrueSora 07:04, 15 October 2009 (UTC)


 * It's more/less equivalent to recommending that one merge C and C++ Tedickey (talk) 08:25, 15 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree with Tedickey. As with C and C++, one language is rooted in the other, but they are two different languages.  -- Tom N (tcncv) talk/contrib 22:56, 15 October 2009 (UTC)


 * See, I see a substantial difference between the C/C++ dichotomy and the VB/VB.NET one. First off, no one would go to the page for C when looking for C++. Any reasonable C++ programmer would know the difference. Meanwhile, the last two versions of "VB.NET" are named Visual Basic, so it's not only reasonable, but rational, to assume that people would look for VB 2005 and 2008 on the Visual Basic page. Furthermore, it actually makes sense to do so, because it is the newest product with the actual name Visual Basic.


 * I mean, obviously the only reason I didn't just do it was because I figured this might generate some controversy, so perhaps we can strike a compromise. How about, instead of merging the two pages, we move Visual Basic to a new page, Visual Basic (Legacy), and move VB .NET to Visual Basic? This keeps the "C/C++"-like separation that you two wanted to keep, while moving the more recent product named Visual Basic to the page of the same name. - TheTrueSora 15:56, 17 October 2009 (UTC)


 * At the moment, I'm compiling a C program with a C++ compiler - something which numerous people do as a matter of course. Tedickey (talk) 21:42, 22 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I am an advocate of renaming the existing Visual Basic article. My preference is Visual Basic (classic), because it more closely follows common usage.  That would make way for a rename of this article.  I suspect that veteran VB developers think in terms of VB classic and VB .NET, while newer developers are more likely to follow Microsoft's lead calling the current product simply Visual Basic.  Merging the articles would be problematic, as many topics (control structures, data types, memory management, data access, and other library functions)  would require separate treatment for the pre- and post- .NET versions of the product.  -- Tom N (tcncv) talk/contrib 16:23, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
 * After some consideration, I'm inclined to agree with you. If no one has a substantive objection within a few days, I'll do it. - TheTrueSora 04:27, 20 October 2009 (UTC)


 * As a VB6 programmer, I'm forced to agree with most of the above. I much prefer classic VB to anything .Net, and I'm involved in a few non-.Net VB communities, but .Net is the way MS is moving nowadays. I vote move it. -- Eriksiers (talk) 20:06, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

(outdent) Do we have a consensus for a move? Visual Basic to Visual Basic (classic) and Visual Basic .NET to Visual Basic, or should we use a different name? If we are a go, I would suggest a three stage move:
 * 1) Move Visual Basic to Visual Basic (classic)
 * 2) Scan the links and redirects to Visual Basic and modify them to reference Visual Basic (classic). Not all links should be changed.  Some may be generic and other may more properly point to the .NET article.  WP:AutoWikiBrowser can be used to process these.
 * 3) After link cleanup is complete, move Visual Basic .NET to Visual Basic. Visual Basic .NET will remain as a redirect to Visual Basic.


 * I've never heard of "Visual Basic classic" - VB3, VB4, VB5, VB6, yes, but the "classic" title sounds like something designed by a committee.  Perhaps an alternative would be for "Visual Basic" to become a diambiguation page and this article to become "Visual Basic 6"?  In any event, not in favour of any merger as VB6 and VB.net are very different animals.   Socrates2008 ( Talk )  09:17, 21 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Agree (Wikipedia's not supposed to make up terminology, but reflect common usage). I'd thought the existing dablink at the top of this topic was unambiguous.  (Calling "this" topic "Visual Basic 6" is problematic since VB5 is somewhat different from VB6, etc). Tedickey (talk) 21:45, 22 October 2009 (UTC)


 * In VB circles, it's generally not VB classic, it's non-.Net VB (or classic VB, depending on where and when), but Visual Basic (classic) really does seem (to me) to be the best way to sum it up.
 * As far as VB6 vs VB5, there really isn't that much difference, especially when compared to, say, VB5 vs VB4. VB4 to VB5 introduced some new keywords, new data types, compiling to native code and an MDI IDE; VB5 to VB6 mostly just introduced new keywords, new project types, and (many) new bugs. (Maybe a new data type or two... can't remember.) -- Eriksiers (talk) 00:19, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Not sure why this has been abandoned... I am a previous VB6 / current .NET programmer and am confused by the way the page names disassociate new VB functionality from the original language. I agree with Tcncv and TheTrueSora. Yes, Wikipedia is not supposed to invent new names, but following a page name with " (classic)" is merely a disambiguation technique- is akin to adding " (album)" or " (series)", which is standard. The current name is flat out wrong. Microsoft does not consider "Visual Basic" to be a dead language (which is exactly what this page implies), and frankly on this issue, Microsoft is the final authority.

I think we all agree that a merger is a bad idea because of the fundamental changes the language went through. But there really is no dilemma here- VB1-6 and VB.NET are two related but different languages and so warrant separate pages. They share a common name, so the less common usage should be distinguished somehow. At the very least VB1-6 should become "Visual Basic (clasic)" and this page should become a disambiguation, because "Visual Basic" does not mean what this page states it means. It does not matter if adding " (classic)" to a page name is slightly misinforming, because the current name is even more-so.

Lets vote on it though (the VB->VB (classic) and VB .NET->VB proposal). Between myself, Tcncv, and TheTrueSora, that's 3. Unless there are any objections I think one more supporter of the change should be enough. Ian Burnet (talk) 04:58, 12 December 2009 (UTC)


 * VB6 (or classic VB) is very different from VB.net as VB classic is a native language, where as vb.net is an interpreted language...I don't really see the point in merging these two clearly distinct languages.Smallman12q (talk) 02:18, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Stuff removed from Boolean data type article
The following section was removed from the article Boolean data type: begin removed text

In Visual Basic Boolean values from comparisons can be stored in variables with the  data type, which is stored as a 16-bit signed integer, but should only have the values   and. For example:

Because Boolean are stored in 16 bits, coercion or passing of values from other languages (e.g. via COM) may take other values. This is dangerous since the Visual Basic runtime uses an exclusive OR operation for negation; other values turn "True" into "True" violating the law of excluded middle. This can lead to subtle bugs that are extremely hard to detect.

end removed text Is there a place for this text in the VisualBasic-related articles? Perhaps in the Wikibook? Thanks, and all the best, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 00:15, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

plz mention five important properties of VB abjects? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.124.160.226 (talk) 10:39, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Critcisms?
This article needs a criticisms section - there have been some shocking design decisions made in the past around VB that have resulted in particularly problematic issues for developers, users and sysadmins. Not all of these apply to vb.net anymore. Off the top of my head:  Socrates2008 ( Talk )   06:57, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
 * No strong type checking
 * Versioning of .OCX files/DLL hell
 * Option Explicit not enforced
 * Very tricky interop with API parameters, e.g. pointers, strings
 * No unicode support
 * No multi-thread support
 * No proper OO (inheritance, override etc)
 * Lack of crypto support
 * Lack of proper Registry support
 * No native .ini file support
 * Lack of proper error handling constructs
 * No late binding of DLL's
 * No way to trap system messages
 * No native support for pointers
 * Function arguments are passed by reference unless overridden with Byval
 * Can't write console apps
 * Can't write services
 * Poor support for commandline arguments
 * Can't return an exitcode (errorlevel) to parent process when quitting


 * Absolutely. The article reads too much like a company promo.  And some info on complaints about VB being replaced by VB.net.  I hear that's only a rapid development environment for professionals.  Diderot&#39;s dreams (talk) 03:32, 4 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Most of what is listed above are features that are present in some other contemporary or present day languages, that were not included in Visual Basic. I don't think it's accurate to classify these as criticisms.  It's like criticizing a hammer for not having a phillips screwdriver attachment.  The language is what it is.  If it doesn't have the necessary features for a particular job, then maybe it's the wrong tool for that job.  One exception is DLL Hell, but that isn't a VB issue, it was an issue with the MS Windows architecture in general.  -- Tcncv (talk) 01:33, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmm, not quite. It's more like criticising a hammer for not having a claw, or for having a plastic handle. VB's design has allowed developers to produce some absolutely shocking code at worst, and inefficient at least (e.g. variant data type), not to mention frustrations dealing with the shortcomings of the language.  Socrates2008 ( Talk )   07:08, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I disagree with over half the above list. I won't go into it point by point, but most can be covered by one of the following three answers: A) It's optional, find the setting and toggle it, B) Use the Windows API and stop being a little girl, or C) You are wrong and should study up. I would say 6 of your list stand as they are. The rest are either wrong, optional or a straightforward "workaround" exists. SoxSexSax (talk) 17:12, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

-Never encountered this issue
 * Versioning of .OCX files/DLL hell

-It is if you turn the option on
 * Option Explicit not enforced

-Completely False.
 * No unicode support

-False, doable via API
 * No multi-thread support

-False, doable via API
 * Lack of proper Registry support

-False, doable via API. And you can write the code in minutes to do so manually.
 * No native .ini file support

-False, doable via Subclassing
 * No way to trap system messages

-Which is a good thing
 * Function arguments are passed by reference unless overridden with Byval

-False, I've written one.
 * Can't write console apps

-Eh? What are you expecting?
 * Poor support for commandline arguments

Techni (talk) 01:22, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Sample Code
I feel that having too many samples distracts from this article. The recent addition by MTS15 and TetraUK don't add additional information to the article and are just link trolling. If these members wish to contribute samples, they should do so in the WikiBooks. To accomodate this, I've added a reference to the WikiBooks on VB in the Sample Code section.

BTW - Is there a simple set of code samples that could be included in every Computer Language article?

Something like:
 * Hello World
 * Reading/Writing a Text File
 * etc

Christopher G Lewis (talk) 19:39, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I would say Hello World would definitely be one, also reading/writing a text file would be good. Probably the other couple samples for all languages are Basic Input and Output. In the case of VB this would be either input box and message box calls or text box and labels as these are the main input and output methods.if we decide what would be a few good samples I'd be willing to supply the source for them.
 * Mjwest10 (talk) 23:17, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I think the The "Printing multiplication table of 5 on form" sample code is wrong. The line "Print 5;.." won't work in VB6 (which I presume the code is written for). Print is either a method (as in Debug.Print) or a file I/O statement (as in Print #filenumber, outputlist). To print on a form, you need to use a label, textbox etc. Am I correct? Redbook (talk) 23:34, 11 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I know this comment was quite old, but no. The type of Print statement you're talking about is implicitly qualified relative to the current Form. That is, "Print 5" would be equivalent to "Me.Print 5". It's really a mess. 67.158.43.41 (talk) 08:00, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Time to merge
I think we've gone through enough versions without the .NET name that we should just merge these together into a single article covering the full range of VB releases. -- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 16:19, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

This has been discussed time and time again. Visual Basic Classic and VB.NET are very different languages, despite what the VB.NET article says. (c.f. the samples on that same article) The merger notices have been removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.158.224.232 (talk) 03:18, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

VB3 millions of sales
The statement says "selling in the millions", while the given source refers to "more than a million VB programmers". Instead of each programmer buying multiple copies (which could be construed as millions - given a suitable source - the source only supports "about a million copies". TEDickey (talk) 22:08, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

many independant(sic) companies
Presumably also using the MSDN source, note that says something different: "A huge third party cottage industry". TEDickey (talk) 22:11, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Widely criticised(sic)
A single example is not sufficient to support this phrase (unless the example happens to be an authoritative author who comments for example that the defects are widely known, and is reminding the reader of this before the latest foray) TEDickey (talk) 22:13, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

entry point for many commercial programmers
To support something like this, you need some source that gives solid numbers, and constrasts that with the total population of "commercial programmers" (no marketing spiel) TEDickey (talk) 22:15, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

heavy learning requirement of other development platforms
Again, a knowledgeable source is needed here, not simply some random coder making comments about VB TEDickey (talk) 22:17, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

"Ironically, around this time"
Is this section about Microsoft Antispyware relevant here? Apollograce (talk) 23:48, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

hello world — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.251.187.99 (talk) 18:30, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

CodeProject comments vs Reliable sources
See the overview of WP:RS - the [ISpliter] link lacks each attribute. Rather, it looks like something based on one of the blogs which are (usually) reverted without argument (other than, of course, by their respective authors) TEDickey (talk) 21:49, 3 April 2014 (UTC)


 * The attempt at providing a better source missed the point entirely, since the provided link was irrelevant to the comments made by the editor. Use the discussion page if there are any useful WP:RS for this topic TEDickey (talk) 08:26, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Dear TEDickey,

I am glad to talk to you again.

There is NOT a matter of trust in the middle with the CodeProject article, since now it has 58-60 of 5 stars votes from reviewers (which are all programmers and IT specialists). I repeated the experiment from the "Blog" and similar results emerged from my own analysis with Google and Bing. Do it yorself and see the results.

VB6 with embedded machine codes makes app's faster than those compiled in C++ (not just faster, but a lot more faster than C++, even I did tests like this). In some instances VB6 does not need any machine code to be faster than c++, it can do that without any help: http://discuss.fogcreek.com/joelonsoftware/default.asp?cmd=show&ixPost=7598

Also, Visual Basic 6.0 rises to 5th place in the official Index of programming language popularity for May 2014 while C# drops to 6th, and VB.Net is 11th: http://www.tiobe.com/index.php/content/paperinfo/tpci/index.html

Best regards,

Megan --109.99.1.46 (talk) 16:11, 10 May 2014 (UTC)


 * hmm - 50 people out of 10 billion like the blog. Your comments are consistent, if nothing else. TEDickey (talk) 16:21, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Dear TEDickey,

A 60 of 5 star votes is very good ranking on CodeProject. Imagine my surprise when I saw that article there, because CodeProject has a phobia regarding Visual Basic :)

I have a suggestion. It would be good to have the rankings of different programing languages on their own pages ? or it will be a subjective thing ?

Best regards,

Megan --109.99.1.46 (talk) 16:42, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

OMG -- VB faster than C++. CodeProject a "reliable" source from "IT professionals". Learn a real language and use it for a few years, kid -- then you'll understand that VB should never have even existed in the first place! Good luck!

Criticisms
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.71.60.34 (talk) 23:46, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Inability to create multi-threaded applications, without resorting to Windows API calls Um, a lot of stuff needs API calls. And they are easy.
 * 2) Lack of unicode support Actually it does support it
 * 3) Inability to create console applications Actually it does support it, I've made one before
 * 4) Variant types have a greater performance and storage overhead than strongly typed programming languages Um... They have to.


 * what the heck is wrong with using the WinAPI for creating threads? why critize VB6 for needing WinAPI to make threads? makes no sense to me, it's a perfectly valid way of making threads. did any1 critize C++ for using WinAPI to create threads prior to c++11? 85.165.164.214 (talk) 02:31, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Language Features - no speaka
The very first sentence of the very first section after the lede:

< Visual Basic was designed to accommodate a steep learning curve. >

Can we have that in English, please?

86.173.174.134 (talk) 00:11, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Ongoing community support
Hello, I propose the inclusion of a subchapter addressing the topic of ongoing significant user interest despite being EOL which found significant media response. This includes support of VB6 by this community in many forms: petitions, fix projects, even a crowdfunding project. The proposed text is here cheers Shaddim (talk) 09:03, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
 * That phrasing about tens of thousands is jarring, since there's no support in the (weak, old) sources. If you had not started this thread by dredging up old edits, there would be something to explore TEDickey (talk) 09:08, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
 * please, drop this unfounded claim about old edits. If there is an correlation between my new edit and older one, it should be taken as indication that this topic and matter was and is relevant. On the constructive side, thanks for the reformulation suggestion, very welcome. Shaddim (talk) 09:27, 5 April 2016 (UTC)


 * There's little point in arguing, because it's trivial (though time consuming) to go back through the history and show, point-by-point where you have reused the old edits. TEDickey (talk) 08:51, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Than resist your urge on making unfounded claims. Back on topic, where do you see WP policies in conflict for including of information about an vivid user community post-EOL? Shaddim (talk) 09:20, 6 April 2016 (UTC)


 * So far, none of your comments have been constructive or to the point. I pointed out that the statement which you pasted in from an old edit is not found in the given source, and rather than pointing to a better source, continue to make random comments unrelated to the topic. TEDickey (talk) 09:00, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
 * for the last time, my contribution was my text. Proof it otherwise, drop this claim or I will get angry. On the topic, give please explicity feedback how this cobtribution can be improved or fails a specific policy. Up to now it just looks like you overreacted under wrong assumptions Shaddim (talk) 10:31, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

promotional edits for Alan Cooper
Essentially none of the paragraph discussing Alan Cooper is sourced; the small residual (see linked topic) is not referenced to any reliable third-party source TEDickey (talk) 19:00, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Likewise, adding a link to Cooper's website is not an improvement. Rather, a suitable source would be independent TEDickey (talk) 00:17, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

single-lines
A recent edit asserts that Visual Basic is limited to single lines. Actually, VB6 supports continuation lines. Here is an example of it being discussed TEDickey (talk) 00:35, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note that I wrote to assert conventionally, not limited in the sense of restricted, and only because there is no distinct line terminator. The only mistake I made is not remembering which version introduced it, which becomes the dubious part. I can't find a reference to it, nor remember it, and I've been working with VB since 3 in 1993. Note that point of your linked article is that multiline becomes limited at 24 lines. It would be best not to get into the merits of the feature at this point in its life, since I'm sure it has been beaten to death in forums, except to say that most statements are one line, which was and still is the convention for Visual Basic. The main point of my edit was that the section was comparing to C, or other brace-based languages, which is a restricted point of view. Group29 (talk) 16:11, 16 July 2017 (UTC) I dug up my VB 3.0 manual, and continuation is there too. So since the beginning of my history with VB it has been there. Group29 (talk) 16:28, 16 July 2017 (UTC)


 * However, to support the editorialization "conventionally", you still need a reliable source. By the way, this reminds me of a similar situation with JavaScript TEDickey (talk) 18:58, 16 July 2017 (UTC)


 * What else would work? "Typically", "usually". And you are correct, even though that is the convention, there is no article saying "that's just the way it is" because of no line endings. How did the JavaScript discussion resolve? Group29 (talk) 22:28, 16 July 2017 (UTC)


 * A while back, I was interested in running JavaScript through an indent program, but found that semicolons on the end of statements were optional. Thinking about it, the same applied to Fortran (the compiler just knows when it's had enough).  For the other, I'd just leave out the qualification "typically" and just note that unlike some other languages such as C, there's no statement terminator for Visual Basic. TEDickey (talk) 00:08, 17 July 2017 (UTC)