VAB Confusion

[cincode5]

Hopefully one of you VB experts out there can help clarify something for me. I want to learn VB and can get VB for Apps from my employer. But is this version of VB designed for creating applications , or providing a common language to manipulate MS apps, or both. Would learning VB from this version be advisable?

 

[Cindy M -WordMVP-]

Hi =?Utf-8?B?Y2luY29kZTU=?=,

Hopefully one of you VB experts out there can help clarify something for me. I want to

learn VB and can get VB for Apps from my employer. But is this version of VB designed for
creating applications , or providing a common language to manipulate MS apps, or both.
Would learning VB from this version be advisable?VB and VB for applications are two different things. VBA uses a subset of VB for common
functions, such as string manipulation, date calculations, looping, file management and
such. But the major part of VBA is the "A": an object model for a particular application.

If you want to learn VB, you have to use VB

Cindy Meister
INTER-Solutions, Switzerland
http://homepage.swissonline.ch/cindymeister (last update Jun 8 2004)
http://www.word.mvps.org

This reply is posted in the Newsgroup; please post any follow question or reply in the
newsgroup and not by e-mail

 

[Amedee Van Gasse]

Cindy M -WordMVP- <mailto:[email protected]> leverde op 17 jun
2004 een briljante bijdrage in
<Klik op deze link om het
bericht in zijn oorspronkelijke context te lezen:

Hi =?Utf-8?B?Y2luY29kZTU=?=,

learn VB and can get VB for Apps from my employer. But is this
version of VB designed for creating applications , or providing a
common language to manipulate MS apps, or both. Would learning VB
from this version be advisable?
VB and VB for applications are two different things. VBA uses a subset
of VB for common functions, such as string manipulation, date
calculations, looping, file management and such. But the major part of
VBA is the "A": an object model for a particular application.

If you want to learn VB, you have to use VB

Correct, however:
- VB and VBA have a common syntax
- VBA comes with all the Microsoft Office apps like Excel or Word, so you
don't have to buy it separately
- Any experience you have in VBA will not be wasted when learning VB (or
vice versa)
- It's quite possible to just cut&paste parts of code between VB & VBA,
if you know what you are doing.
- Actually, VBA *is* VB, but with a whole bunch of object references to
the application you are using as the VBA server.
- On the other hand, VB does not need an application as a server, but can
run stand-alone. But it does not have all the object references that come
with the VBA of a specific app. (not by default, anyway)

--
Amedee Van Gasse
http://www.amedee.be

Dit bericht is geplaatst in een nieuwsgroep. Post je evt antwoord of
vervolgvraag graag in de nieuwsgroep a.u.b.

 

[cincode5]

Cindy, Amedee,

Thanks so much. This was very useful information as my intent is to develop standalone exe's. I will focus my efforts on VB for now...

Thx again

 

[Jonathan West]

"Amedee Van Gasse"

Cindy M -WordMVP- <mailto:[email protected]> leverde op 17 jun
2004 een briljante bijdrage in
<Klik op deze link om het
bericht in zijn oorspronkelijke context te lezen:


Correct, however:
- VB and VBA have a common syntax

Not any more! The syntax for the last 2 versions of VB produced by Microsoft
(when they changed the name to VB.NET) has changed very much.

- VBA comes with all the Microsoft Office apps like Excel or Word, so you
don't have to buy it separately
- Any experience you have in VBA will not be wasted when learning VB (or
vice versa)

Unfortunately, with the changed syntax, that can no longer be assumed

- It's quite possible to just cut&paste parts of code between VB & VBA,
if you know what you are doing.

Not any longer...

- Actually, VBA *is* VB, but with a whole bunch of object references to
the application you are using as the VBA server.
- On the other hand, VB does not need an application as a server, but can
run stand-alone. But it does not have all the object references that come
with the VBA of a specific app. (not by default, anyway)

What you are saying is true of a comparison between VBA and VB6. But VB6 has
not been on sale for some years now.

 

[Amedee Van Gasse]

Jonathan West <mailto:[email protected]> leverde op 17 jun 2004 een
briljante bijdrage in <Klik
op deze link om het bericht in zijn oorspronkelijke context te lezen:

"Amedee Van Gasse"
<nzrqrr.qvgzntjrt.ina.tnffr.qvgzntbbxjrt@orfgnngavrg.rztebhc.qbabgfcnz.
or> wrote in message


Not any more! The syntax for the last 2 versions of VB produced by
Microsoft (when they changed the name to VB.NET) has changed very
much.

Correct!
I should have written VB6 and not just VB.
However where I come from, when you speak about VB it is implied that you
mean VB6, and if not, that you explicitly say or write VB.NET.

It should also be mentioned that VB.NET is not just an upgrade or a name
change for VB6, but it is actually an entirely new programming language,
based on the common .NET Framework, which is also used by C#.

Saying that VB.NET is an upgrade for VB6 would be as wrong as saying that
Java is an upgrade for C++, though very much of Java is based on C++.

However, since the OP asked about VB and not about VB.NET, I assumed my
answer was sufficient enough, in respect to the level of knowledge of the
OP, based on the type of question asked.

What you are saying is true of a comparison between VBA and VB6. But
VB6 has not been on sale for some years now.

Not entirely correct!
VB6 is not available in the shops any more, thats true.
But you can stil get it through some special Microsoft distribution
channel.

--
Amedee Van Gasse
http://www.amedee.be

Dit bericht is geplaatst in een nieuwsgroep. Post je evt antwoord of
vervolgvraag graag in de nieuwsgroep a.u.b.

 

[Amedee Van Gasse]

=?Utf-8?B?Y2luY29kZTU=?= <mailto:[email protected]>
leverde op 17 jun 2004 een briljante bijdrage in
<Klik op deze link om het
bericht in zijn oorspronkelijke context te lezen:

Cindy, Amedee,

Thanks so much. This was very useful information as my intent is to
develop standalone exe's. I will focus my efforts on VB for now...

Thx again

Then you should also know:
- What is commonly called just VB, is actually VB6, and that is not being
sold any more in shops, only by special MS distribution channels.
- My comparison was between VB6 and VBA.
- Since a few years there is VB.NET, and that is *not* the next version of
VB, but actually an entirely new language.

--
Amedee Van Gasse
http://www.amedee.be

Dit bericht is geplaatst in een nieuwsgroep. Post je evt antwoord of
vervolgvraag graag in de nieuwsgroep a.u.b.

 

[Karl E. Peterson]

However where I come from, when you speak about VB it is implied that you
mean VB6, and if not, that you explicitly say or write VB.NET.

Sadly, Microsoft is determined to destroy even this distinction. :-(

http://blogs.msdn.com/rgreen_msft/archive/2004/03/16/90506.aspx

 

[Amedee Van Gasse]

Karl E. Peterson <mailto:[email protected]> leverde op 22 jun 2004 een
briljante bijdrage in <Klik
op deze link om het bericht in zijn oorspronkelijke context te lezen:

Sadly, Microsoft is determined to destroy even this distinction. :-(

http://blogs.msdn.com/rgreen_msft/archive/2004/03/16/90506.aspx

I read:
Similarly, VB 2005 is obviously the .NET version and you know what it is,
whether or not is has .NET.

So they'll call it VB 2005 and not VB.NET 2005.
Well, that still *is* different from VB6, wouldn't you agree?
Anyway, we're 2004 now, and VB6 is from when, 1998 or something? And
people are still actively using it.
In the article they talk about (Word for) DOS. Well, we have some clients
that have some DOS apps for very specific business needs, and I can't see
them switching to a .NETified version of these apps.

--
Amedee Van Gasse
http://www.amedee.be

Dit bericht is geplaatst in een nieuwsgroep. Post je evt antwoord of
vervolgvraag graag in dezelfde thread in de nieuwsgroep a.u.b.

 

[Karl E. Peterson]

Amedee Van Gasse

Karl E. Peterson <mailto:[email protected]> leverde op 22 jun 2004 een
briljante bijdrage in <Klik
op deze link om het bericht in zijn oorspronkelijke context te lezen:


I read:
Similarly, VB 2005 is obviously the .NET version and you know what it is,
whether or not is has .NET.

So they'll call it VB 2005 and not VB.NET 2005.
Well, that still *is* different from VB6, wouldn't you agree?

Oh sure. My only point was, they're actively trying to blur the distinction. That's
only going to hurt the users (customers!), in particular as they try searching the
web for information relevent to the version they're using.

Anyway, we're 2004 now, and VB6 is from when, 1998 or something? And
people are still actively using it.

As they will for some time to come, yep.

In the article they talk about (Word for) DOS. Well, we have some clients
that have some DOS apps for very specific business needs, and I can't see
them switching to a .NETified version of these apps.

LOL! Nope, me either.

Later... Karl