3 ms·
“VB6 makes 95% of programming simple and the other 5% impossible.”
by dole 7y ago
“VB6 makes 95% of programming simple and the other 5% impossible.”
- hu3 7y agoMore like "95% simple and 5% possible". VB6 can call win APIs and C++ code for when some arcane functionality is needed.
- throwaway5752 7y agoTake https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/oaidl/ns-oaidl-variant?redirectedfrom=MSDN https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/oaidl/ns-... and https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/winbase/nf-winbase-readeventloga https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/winbase/n... and try to sensibly read a bunch of _EVENTLOGRECORD's of varying lengths. "possible" is technically true but charitable.
- int_19h 7y agoYou don't need any of that. VB6 had C FFI (Lib/Alias), structs, and function pointers (AddressOf). So you could just implement a function in straight C, compile it into a DLL, and invoke it from VB.
- throwaway5752 7y agoI know but already function prototyping of a DLL your write to get around language limitations isn't quite in the spirit of "things you can do in VB6". And technical you could do it in VB, but it was pulling teeth. I could just as easily write it in java and shell out to it. In VB it was hard pretty difficult. But you are completely correct, that's the right thing to do. I don't have bad feelings towards VB at all. Even today it was probably the most productive GUI development environment I've ever seen. But function prototypes returning structs / buffers? OnError GoTo <label>? Nostalgia only goes so far. ps - noticed the employer on the profile. Powershell + .NET assemblies crushed it, and VB.NET was a far superior language (though, just like all the jvm languages have the same feel, all the IL based ones did and why not use C# at that point?)
- OkGoDoIt 7y agoThat’s an admirable achievement, honestly