potential PPC Amiga REAL CHEAP

[adolescent]

Sorry, you forgot the quotes which made quite a difference.

"VB sucks" vs. "C sucks"

Thank goodness, the future of computer science is now secure.  :-D

[adolescent]

@lou

It's all preference.  You like BASIC, everyone else likes C.  You say C sucks, everyone else says BASIC sucks.  Get it?

[adolescent]

lou_dias wrote:

Well, since MS has produced MAC software they must have a PPC compiler for Visual Studio, so it's not out of the question...infact, since they use Visual Studio to make 360 games which uses a PPC-based cpu, it's entirely possible, you know, once you pay me to do it.   :-P

The Xbox 360 SDK, just like the original Xbox SDK, supports only Visual C++.  There is no VB, .NET, framework, CLR, etc. for the Xbox 360 (and why would there be?).

[adolescent]

koaftder wrote:

Lou_Dias:
Elly D up in tha hizzouse biotch. Yo, represent, i writes all muh boot loader code in vee bee dot net muthafuck4. Malloc, ptthhh, programma please, my junk is tight managed, this is 06 brutha.

vee bee dot net muthafuck4!  :lol: :lol: :lol:

[adolescent]

lou_dias wrote:

Actually, unlike VB 6.0, Vb.Net's code files (source code) makes reverse-engineering a compiler for an alternate platform ALOT easier.  Every property involved in creating forms and controls is exposed in the source code.  It would just be a matter of creating [insert platform of choice] libraries functionally equivalent to MS's .Net Runtime libraries and a compiler.

Sure the IL is readable (unless you run it through a good obfuscator which breaks ILDASM).  

But, it's the mscorelib that needs to be reverse engineered.  And, that's not a simple task of changing API call for API call.  You could probably learn a lot from the documentation, reflection, etc. but making a full replacement is not going to be easy.

(Also, VB.net code still mysteriously calls the old vb libraries, mainly for backwards compatibility...  so you'd have to reverse that too)

[adolescent]

lou_dias wrote:

A better counter-point would be to show me something that can only be done in C and not VB.Net.  

Ok.  (I'll stick to Windows, since you already said you weren't interested in cross compatibility)

Low level OS control, system calls*, port access, memory management, use inline assembly, make fast running programs, etc.

Note:
Yes, I know you can DllImport just about any dll.  But, not all API calls are exposed in the system dlls.  So, to write a wrapper you'd have to use VC++!

[adolescent]

lou_dias wrote:

All the old 6.0 WinAPI calls still work.  You do when defining a structure have to use the new method but all api calls still work.  I communicate with COM and LPT ports both through an ActiveX wrapper and directly using some code I found on MSDN:

http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;823179

And what about stuff that isn't in the API?

For ports, as I said and you've shown, it's possible with a wrapper or system library access.  With this you're limited to what dll is available, and wether the method is available that does what you want, and is externally accessible.

How about this (it's fairly common to need this information);  Get CPU information, speed, model, manufacturer, stepping, etc. using just VB code.  

[adolescent]

@mdma

In the US, VB is taught to CIS students.  

CS students don't get the easy way out.  (Although, my school recently cancelled their last remaining assembly course.  I always wanted to get back there and take it but I had a bad experience with the professor in a previous calculus class.)

[adolescent]

lou_dias wrote:

Code: [Select]

Imports System.Management

Dim query As New ManagementObjectSearcher("select * from win32_processor")

For Each cpu As ManagementObject In query.Get()

    Console.WriteLine(cpu("Name"))
    Console.WriteLine(cpu("Speed"))

Next

Since you are dependant on WMI running, what about systems that don't have WMI and/or have it disabled.

[adolescent]

Karlos wrote:

There is one language that is actually quite useable for all these purposes and more. And it isn't VB. It's C.

Darn.  I was hoping you'd say C#.  :-?  J#?  :-? :-? :-?

[adolescent]

One more thing C/C++ can do that VB.NET can't.  Earn you more money.

Software Development Magazine/Salary Survey 2005/Average Salary by Languages Used

For people that don't want to sign up.  (I've removed some of the fluff, mainly because I don't want to admit that a Python programmer makes more than me.  :-D)
     

Code: [Select]


C   $87K   $104K
C++ $87K $104K
J2EE $87K $106K
J2ME $86K $107K
Java $85K $103K
C# $82K $102K
.NET $81K $100K
Cobol   $79K   $99K


Edit: put this thing in a code block so it would line up right.

[adolescent]

lou_dias wrote:
Gee, I'd hate to get back on topic and all but...

That's back on topic?  Or, was "Lou Diaz's Random Nintendo Fanboy Rants" the topic all along and you were just using OS4 as a smokescreen to spread your Pro-Nintendo, Pro-VB.NET, and Pro-Pontiac Fiero propaganda.   :-P

[adolescent]

lou_dias wrote:

There are actually atleast several fuel-cell-powered Fieros on the road.

Fuel cell powered Fieros? :crazy:  Now I've heard everything in this thread.  

[adolescent]

lou_dias wrote:
I've seen this one in person, the owner lives 1/2 hour away in Wareham, Mass

http://www.fieropride.com/~fieropr/gallery/fac2004/res51969

but this is a gas fuel cell, not electric

LOL.  Having a "fuel cell" (ie. competition fuel tank) doesn't make it a fuel cell powered car.  :crazy:  :crazy:  :crazy:

[adolescent]

@lou

:huh:  No fuel cell powered Fieros there either Diaz.

[adolescent]

lou_dias wrote:

learn how to spell first then go re-read my edited message

Diaz, but those are all electric, not fuel cell. :rtfm: