2

I am not sure if this is a dupe. I came across this Switching from VB.NET to C# - any advice for learning C#?

My case is the reverse. I would be moving from C# to VB.Net. To be more precise, I would be moving from C# 3.0 to VB 10.0 (.Net 3.5 to .Net 4.0). I am initially planning to use a C# to VB converter to cope up with the syntax.

Any other suggestions is highly appreciated.

Community
  • 1
  • 1
AlwaysAProgrammer
  • 2,927
  • 2
  • 31
  • 40
  • 2
    Learn how to touch type...because VB.NET is much more verbose and requires quite a few more keystrokes to get the job done. :-P – Justin Niessner Aug 10 '10 at 21:16
  • 5
    @Charles - I've done it before myself. Better job, better pay...suck it up when it comes to the language. – Justin Niessner Aug 10 '10 at 21:17
  • @Justin - Better job and better pay? Wow, I have no idea where you are living. Just about everything I've seen anywhere pays much better for C# developers and there are a LOT more higher level jobs for C# developers than VB developers. – Charles Boyung Aug 10 '10 at 21:21
  • @Charles, Justin has answered on my behalf. I am switching jobs and the new organization is all in VB.Net. I honestly liked the organization and obviously the pay. – AlwaysAProgrammer Aug 10 '10 at 21:21
  • 3
    It's as they say, 2 languages = bilingual, 3 languages = trilingual, 1 language = probably American, but 10 or more languages = probably a programmer. :) – kbrimington Aug 10 '10 at 21:23
  • @Yogendra - you can always work on trying to change the organization to the superior language :) – Charles Boyung Aug 10 '10 at 21:30
  • @Charles - I live in the middle of nowhere PA. Luckily I have moved back in to C# and my life is as it should be again. Heh. – Justin Niessner Aug 10 '10 at 21:31
  • There was this question last August about converting C# knowledge to VB.Net for a whole team, rather than an individual. I think this question is a duplicate, voting to close http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1337253/converting-c-knowledge-to-vb-net-any-potential-problems – MarkJ Aug 11 '10 at 08:20

6 Answers6

6

OReilly have a very old (circa 2002) book that covers the differences between the two languages, with an eye to converting between them - I used it last year for switching from C# (3.5) to VB 9 (job required it for some aspects and maintaining old projects) and it was a great starting point so its still quite relevent!

http://oreilly.com/catalog/9780596003197

4

According to MS (I heard this from the MS project manager for VB.NET), the number of programmers for C# and VB.Net are roughly the same. So if you believe him, it is not really a career limiting move.

C# and VB.Net are moving into a co-evolving cycle. The main difference between the two will primarily be the language syntax, and not their capabilities. There will always be small differences, like I can't see VB.NET forcing the use of semi-colons, and I can't see C# having automatic statement terminators. Pretty much anything you can do in C# you can do in VB.NET now.

My advice to learn it is to sit down and try and learn the syntax. It's not like switching from C# to F# where there are fundamental differences in approach. If you find yourself thinking, "Man I could do this in C#," Chances are, with .Net 4.0, you can do it in vb.net....now if you only knew a qa programming board you could ask about how to do something in vb.net by giving a C# example..... :)

kemiller2002
  • 113,795
  • 27
  • 197
  • 251
  • 1
    @kevin "the number of programmers for c# and vb.net are roughly the same" is not equivalent to "the number of jobs for c# and vb.net are roughly the same." - and i never inferred or stated that vb.net is inferior; in some areas it is superior (xml literals etc) – x0n Aug 10 '10 at 21:26
  • Never implied that you did, but if the number of positions for VB.NET programmers is the same, then one can infer that the number of positions are roughly the same too. What I meant is that programming VB.NET is not like programming COBOL where there are an ever number of shrinking jobs. – kemiller2002 Aug 10 '10 at 21:29
  • @kevin I take it you meant "the number of programmers for" in the earlier part of that comment; with this is mind, I say that I don't agree. IMO, when Microsoft state the number of VB.NET programmers, they most likely include ex VB6'ers who are literally a stone's throw from picking up the language anyway. Many of us MS peeps cut our teeth on VB3/4/5/6 for windows programming as such count for a vote. Marketing. – x0n Aug 10 '10 at 21:32
  • Nope, he clearly meant the number of VB.NET programmers. I thought the same thing too, but he clarified what he meant. It came up, because we kind of asked what MS's position on VB.NET was. He said they kind of intended for C# to entice Java programmers, and VB.NET to entice VB6 programmers to moving to .NET, and like I said, the number of users is roughly the same. – kemiller2002 Aug 10 '10 at 21:40
  • 1
    +1 Here's some links to support you. Lisa Feigenbaum, a Microsoft PM in the .NET Managed Languages Group, said (in this video interview June 2009) there are slightly more VB.NET developers than C#. http://www.infoq.com/news/2009/06/Future-VB.NET Here's a March 2010 blog post explaining the coevolution strategy by the Product Unit Manager for Visual Studio Languages http://blogs.msdn.com/b/scottwil/archive/2010/03/09/vb-and-c-coevolution.aspx – MarkJ Aug 11 '10 at 08:28
  • @markj, @kevin - Interesting stuff but the jobs sites are still chock full of C# jobs, without significant presence for vb.net. I don't know what this means exactly in terms of cardinality of programmers, but it speaks volumes for career limiting moves if you were to ignore c#. – x0n Aug 11 '10 at 20:33
  • @x0n my curiosity leads to if VB.NET programmers place their jobs in different places. Maybe most of those jobs aren't placed on tech boards etc. It's just a thought, I don't know one way or another, but it would be interesting to find out. – kemiller2002 Aug 11 '10 at 21:15
4

I don't understand why there's such debate about VB.Net vs C#. Yep, C# does require fewer keystrokes. But it compiles to exactly the same bytecode.

I usually program in VB.Net as that's what most of the projects I work on are already in. But I don't have a massive problem reading or writing C#. Obviously there's a few little syntactical nuances between the two (which I quickly adjust to) but I don't see any reason why a developer can't be equally proficient in both.

I think C# is more prevalent because the old school 'proper' programmers are more comfortable with the C style syntax whereas people who got into it late and have maybe come from a VBA background prefer VB. I think there's a degree of snobbishness around the whole issue.

I personally prefer having my loops identified with End If and End While and Next rather than } and } and }. But I also like the terseness of C#.

All in all - they're effectively the same. And as for C# being harder I don't really get that. It's purely a syntax issue.

UPDATE (5 years later)

I now spend almost all my time writing C# and JavaScript (and other C-ish syntax languages) and I must say I don't particularly enjoy having to drop back into VB!

I think what you are used to has a great deal to do with what you prefer - and you will adjust your rationale to match your current preference. :)

El Ronnoco
  • 11,753
  • 5
  • 38
  • 65
  • 2
    actually in many areas - for equivalent features - it does NOT compile to the same bytecode; events and event handlers are a good example. – x0n Aug 10 '10 at 21:30
  • This is perhaps the case - I must admit I'm not an expert on the CIL or how it is generated. But for the workaday stuff of loops, routines, passing objects, arithmetic and logic I think there is no significant overhead in terms of size or performance. – El Ronnoco Aug 10 '10 at 21:40
  • Actually, I would disagree with you where you say that "old school" programmers prefer C# and "newer" programmers prefer VB (for whatever reason). I would say it has more to do with the quality of your education. Good software/computer engineering programs in school almost definitely use some C variant (C, C++, C#, java). The lower quality programs (B&CS, tech school Computer Science programs) are prone to actually teaching VB instead of any other language. – Charles Boyung Aug 10 '10 at 21:42
  • @Charles That is essentially what I'm saying. By old school I don't necessarily mean "old" - I mean those who have come from a more 'pure' programming background. People who fall into programming as part of their jobs (ie writing macros for Excel) will naturally tend toward VB as it is more readable and less intimidating - Even though it's doing the same thing. – El Ronnoco Aug 10 '10 at 21:45
  • 1
    @Charles - That is a little elitist (education comment). I'm not sure how true that is either. however... @El Ronnoco - I do think that in general that more and more hiring managers think that C# programmers = better than VB.Net programmers. You can just look on the job boards to confirm that the majority of positions open are for C#. Just my opinion. – webdad3 Aug 10 '10 at 21:50
  • @Jeff - That's based on my own personal research both into various schools (helping my nephew pick one) and interview candidates. Not elitist at all - based on 100% facts. You can't argue that an accredited software engineering program at a well regarded school is the same quality education as a computer science program at your local tech school, can you? – Charles Boyung Aug 11 '10 at 02:14
  • @Charles you are right that a college offers a different education than a tech school. But than someone that goes to Harvard gets a different education than someone that goes to a state school. I guess what got my panties in a bunch was the lower quality programs comment ;) Your point is well taken though! – webdad3 Aug 11 '10 at 15:55
3

The best way to learn a new language is to immerse yourself in it and try not to compare it to any other language you already know. IMO you would be better off taking good examples of VB code and trying to understand them, using a conversion tool to convert to C# if you get lost in the syntax. Trying to write code in C# and convert it VB will always produce substandard code and will slow your progress to learning a new language.

Languages are just tools we use to get the job done, some are easier to understand than others, some produce more elegant code, some have a higher perceived status than others. These days the framework is more important than the syntax of the language you're using. Iif you stick around in programming for long enough your toolset will change and you will either have to change with it or get stuck doing the same old thing day after day.

IME people who are language evangelists are not as smart as those that are language neutral, and regardless of how popular a toolset is now, you don't know what is going to be popular in the future so having the ability to learn a new tool is very important if you wish to persue a career in programming.

fivebob
  • 700
  • 5
  • 6
1

It's not perfect, but this code translator may help you in the initial transition. If you are absolutely lost as to how to write something, write it in C# and then stick it in here. This thing has saved my ass more than a few times.

http://www.carlosag.net/Tools/CodeTranslator/

Ender
  • 14,995
  • 8
  • 36
  • 51
  • Does it work with newer versions of .Net ? My concern is the translator may not work with the new features. – AlwaysAProgrammer Aug 11 '10 at 13:42
  • @Yogendra - That's a good question. Now that you mention it, I realized I haven't used it since .NET 4.0 became available. – Ender Aug 11 '10 at 15:10
0

I have nothing against VB.Net (from time to time I work in it) but this sounds like a seriously career limiting move. I'm guessing you find C# too difficult and are just a beginner. My advice to you is to stick it out, it will get easier. There are waaayyy more C# .NET jobs around over VB.NET ones.

That said, the easiest way to figure out the equivalent syntax (and probably the cheapest) is to write stuff in C#, then load up the compiled assemblies in Reflector and siwtch the language to VB.NET. It won't always be a perfect analog, but it will give you enough hints to get started.

edit: I have never inferred or stated that vb.net is inferior; in some areas it is superior (xml literals etc.)

edit: it appears this answer is not relevant as the poster is having this switch forced upon him. I assumed it was a choice.

-Oisin

x0n
  • 51,312
  • 7
  • 89
  • 111
  • 2
    Why is it a career limiting move? I think its a huge bonus to be competent in both C# and VB as both have their benefits. There are several SO questions listing the unique features of both languages (check out TextFileParser in VB - comes in handy in lots of scenarios, and while its not C# native you can still use it without issue! Never would have discovered that without reading the SO 'Hidden Features of VB.Net' question). Limiting yourself to one or the other is really teh career limiting move imho. –  Aug 10 '10 at 21:24
  • @moo my assumption is/was that the poster is a c# beginner. Like I say to kevin, I am not saying it is inferior - in some ways it is superior to c# (xml literals etc) - i am fairly fluent in both. It's just when I see someone asking for help to learn vb.net, I assume they are new to both languages. Vb.NET is not hard to learn. – x0n Aug 10 '10 at 21:25
  • @x0n : I am not a C# beginner. I have worked with C# for 7 years. never really got a chance to work in VB.Net except for some POCs projects. – AlwaysAProgrammer Aug 10 '10 at 21:28
  • @yogendra - ok, I stand corrected. I just rarely hear of people asking for help in vb, coming from a c# background. It's really not that different, as others have stated. – x0n Aug 10 '10 at 21:33
  • 1
    "load up the compiled assemblies in Reflector and siwtch the language to VB.NET" **seriously**? If I caught someone doing this and committing the result to sourcecontrol at work, there'd be words had. These words "re-write that code so it actually takes advantage of the language, rather than being a machine translation". Reflector's good, but it's not *that* good – Rob Aug 10 '10 at 21:38
  • 3
    @Rob - this is just to learn the equivalent syntax (as was asked), not a production code migration strategy for god's sake... – x0n Aug 10 '10 at 21:41