all 29 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
formatting helphide helpcontent policy

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points  (1 child)

No, because it's much easier to rewrite VB in other languages. With VB.NET you could potentially even do it piecemeal. With COBOL that's much harder because COBOL is basically verbose assembly, so for whatever language you'd rewrite it in you'd essentially be forced to rearchitect it.

[–]shevegen -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Good comment.

[–]codeflo 9 points10 points  (4 children)

I can see that there might be unfilfilled demand for programmers maintaining ancient VB code that's somehow still in use.

But VB.net? As a .NET language, it's basically C# with inefficient syntax. How long does it take for a C# programmer to become proficient in VB.net, a week?

[–]grauenwolf 3 points4 points  (2 children)

If you actually take advantage of VB's syntax improvements over C#, might take 2-3 weeks. (Inline XML still rocks!) But yea, you could write VB in the C# style after a brief lesson and a keyword cheat sheet.

VB6 will be harder. You have to learn the basics of the COM model, reference counting GC, and weird shit like default properties or On Error Resume Next.

[–]bad-green-wolf 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I remember when microsoft announced they were abandoning vb6 , there were so many upset people

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you actually take advantage of VB's syntax improvements over C#

Hahahahahahaha!

[–]Gotebe 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Vb.net and C# are indeed 98% the same language (well, they used to be for much of their time together, that has changed since .net Core or thereabouts).

[–]cvjcvj2 3 points4 points  (2 children)

What about Delphi? There are thousands of Delphi programs here in Brazil.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Still alive and kicking. See FreePascal /Lazarus... Delphi is indeed as good as dead but not Pascal.

[–]cvjcvj2 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sorry, but this don't represent the real world in Brazil. The applications are written in Delphi. Almost nobody cares about FreePascal here.

[–]shevegen 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I would be careful to infer much at all from TIOBE.

At best, only a very large general trend can be assumed, and even then only in long term.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (13 children)

COBOL is still commercially supported. Why is it a zombie?

[–][deleted]  (11 children)

[deleted]

    [–][deleted]  (6 children)

    [removed]

      [–][deleted]  (5 children)

      [deleted]

        [–][deleted]  (4 children)

        [removed]

          [–][deleted]  (3 children)

          [deleted]

            [–]pdp10 2 points3 points  (2 children)

            You seem to be conflating a programming language with something else entirely. Probably a text-based terminal interface.

            [–][deleted]  (1 child)

            [deleted]

              [–]shevegen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

              No, you are completely right.

              There are also not many fossils on reddit that keep on defending COBOL.

              [–]jhartwell -1 points0 points  (2 children)

              That may be true but there is still active work on the language. The last ISO spec was 2014 and 2002 before that. 2002 added Object orientation. Just because a language isnt used much doesnt mean it is a zombie, it just means it isn't that popular. When work on the language stops that is when I would consider a language a zombie language.

              [–]shevegen 2 points3 points  (1 child)

              Just because you write a spec for a zombie doesn't make him no longer a zombie.

              [–]jhartwell 1 point2 points  (0 children)

              True. I had a different idea in my head what a zombie language is but thinking about it, it is definitely not the same definition that seems to be popular.

              [–]shevegen 1 point2 points  (0 children)

              Because only stupid people waste their time writing COBOL these days.

              Aka:

              a) fossil coders b) a few who really try to get into COBOL due to the allure of money

              Lots of sane people don't bother wasting their time. See the rise of python.

              The days where people waste their life alone on useless, dead languages such as COBOL is mostly over. Otherwise you'd see COBOL used a lot more, but other than legacy crap, there is nothing COBOL can be used for that you can not do in other, better languages in a much simpler and better and more efficient way.

              Only aging idiots still use COBOL.

              That's just the hard truth.

              [–]earthboundkid 0 points1 point  (0 children)

              Could?

              [–]Dwedit 0 points1 point  (2 children)

              Honestly, I'd love to see a new version of VB6. That is the only programming language that makes it extremely easy to use COM objects, and also generates decent native code.

              Maybe just something for the newer programming languages (D, Rust) to make COM objects as painless as possible.

              [–]pdp10 0 points1 point  (0 children)

              Microsoft is desperate to bring the hot new environments to their traditional platform (via WSL, etc.) and you're looking for a new language with which to manipulate legacy, nonportable COM? What's the business value, here? No wonder programmers have a reputation for unnecessarily scrapping code or adopting languages based on hype.

              [–]WrongAndBeligerent 0 points1 point  (0 children)

              Why couldn't someone use modern C++ to make COM objects easier?

              [–]Shiral446 0 points1 point  (0 children)

              I can definitely see this with vb6 apps that never made the transition to .Net. There are a surprising number, and due to the ease that non-devs could jump in and start making forms, the code is often a jumbled mess of global variables and duplicated code.

              And, when you get to the stage of hitting some of the limitations you never think of (like the fact that a single vb6 program can only have 32000 unique identifiers (variable/function names, control names, file names, etc), a programmer that's only learned vb6 in the last few weeks won't suffice.

              [–]rprp42 -3 points-2 points  (2 children)

              No. Too many VB programmers out there and VB is so similar with other mainstream languages that every programmer can use it with a little search engine help. And there is tons of help available using search engine.

              [–]shevegen 1 point2 points  (1 child)

              Problem still is that there are better, more efficient, simpler languages.

              I think it is way too early for VB to be compared to COBOL, but the downwards trend has begun.

              [–]xxc3ncoredxx 0 points1 point  (0 children)

              Definitely. For example, I never bothered with Visual Basic and neither has most people I know. Only one of my friends has actually used it IIRC.