That's something that can very easily be written using .NET. In fact, a close friend of mine created a whiteboard sharing application not too long ago using C#.
You might not necessarily hit a wall that says it can't be done, but you will definitely hit a wall that says "this seems too complicated to do in this language." If that's the case, you choose a more suitable language.
On 7/22/2011 2:13 PM, Katherine Moss wrote:
I think that my concern at the moment is limits. If I work most of my programming (for I never want to program to make money, that's the administrator in me), will I eventually hit a wall and find that I want to do something but can't? Like for instance, who's ever seen a web conferencing software written based off the .net framework? -----Original Message----- From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of qubit Sent: Friday, July 22, 2011 4:55 PM To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: Need tutorials of VB6 It's interesting C++ is marginalized as a low level language because it inherited from C the support for such things as register declarations and pointers that can go out of bounds (which can be useful in some contexts) and even asm for getting directly to the assembly level. But it is a also full of all the elaborate high level constructs that get messy for those who mix the high and low level stuff without knowing what they are doing. I don't know about anyone else, but I'm glad there have been spinoff languages that cater to different types of applications. Getting everyone to learn a single unified standard would be difficult and perhaps wouldn't work. I say that because you don't know what future technologies will come along and put pressure on the language lawyers to add new features to the super language, and perhaps some of these would clash -- or and mess up the definition and implementation of the super language. I speak from experience as I worked as a compiler and tool developer for C++ during the years C++ was evolving. The language kept changing so we had to take a messy prototype from research and scramble to make modifications in design to fix inevitable bugs. It was interesting work that I felt privileged to do, but That was a long time ago, and things have moved on. I am using java lately, and indeed it is a different paradigm from C++. So my vote is to keep the languages separate. Happy hacking. --le ----- Original Message ----- From: "Katherine Moss"<Katherine.Moss@xxxxxxxxxx> To:<programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Friday, July 22, 2011 3:20 PM Subject: RE: Need tutorials of VB6 You see, that's what I don't get. If they say (Microsoft, and others), that C# is just as capable as C++ for the lower level stuff if you learn the unsafe code marking technique in it, then why doesn't C# support all things like MAPI, lower-level device drivers, IIS ISAPI filters and extensions, and all other things that it is clearly stated require C++? I mean, if we have Microsoft and other C# sites telling us that C# can do the same things, it just seems a bit silly to have requirements in another language for some things, right? -----Original Message----- From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Littlefield, Tyler Sent: Friday, July 22, 2011 4:11 PM To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: Need tutorials of VB6 c++ is great for lower level. And if you -need- to make calls to win32 (which everything just sort of wraps around anyway), you can use pinvoke (pinvoke.net) On 7/22/2011 1:45 PM, Katherine Moss wrote:I think it's just my feeling that the CLR has been around long enough that it should be ahead of everything else in the Windows OS and environment, and that lower-level languages like C++ should not have to be a requirement for certain things. Take MAPI, for instance. I was reading something about that as I was briefly interested in trying to help when I get good enough on the existing projects there to make open source Outlook Extensions to make it's groupware features not be reliant upon Exchange server to make them work. Take HMailServer for instance. The source is no longer open (though the program is still free thankfully for whatever reason), but add-ins are aloud, so why not give it some groupware abilities and have it be another alternative to Exchange server's masivity? But my point is here that if microsoft seems to be pushing .net, then why are they still requiring certain languages for certain things? You see, this is one of the hopeful things I want to see with Windows 8, that .net and Win32 will be peers rather than separate entities in which they can only cooperate using interop. And talk about interop, Microsoft had intentionally made MAPI unsupportive of interop. Why, I wonder? Sounds like a nasty marketing tactic. I can't prove that, but that was more of an inferred thing when reading about it. -----Original Message----- From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Littlefield, Tyler Sent: Friday, July 22, 2011 3:16 PM To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: Need tutorials of VB6 You've explained what enhancement (since there is only 1) in terms of memory management, but you were throwing around "benafits of the CLR," when we were talking about native c++, and thus the CLR wouldn't really matter there. Oppinions are nice, but what you give generally is misguided information because you've developed some overbearing urge toward .net without any actual reasoning behind it beyond "x says it's awesome, it must be awesome." On 7/22/2011 9:18 AM, Katherine Moss wrote:In terms of facts though, I mean, what facts? Is not programming, which language is better, which language offers enhancements for which user, isn't that always going to be an opinion? I mean, I've been asked before to state facts regarding the .net framework's superiority over other programming models. How in the world am I supposed to do that if the only real stuff out there saying that it's better are opinions anyway? So anything I state that's better than other models, isn't that an opinion? And just restating what Microsoft has to say regarding their own technology, that's kind of counterproductive, isn't it? -----Original Message----- From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ken Perry Sent: Friday, July 22, 2011 11:15 AM To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: RE: Need tutorials of VB6 I know it's hard to say anything sometimes but say it anyway and just ignore the rif raf. Ken -----Original Message----- From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Katherine Moss Sent: Friday, July 22, 2011 10:19 AM To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: RE: Need tutorials of VB6 I was going to say that too, but my presence tends to poison the network, so I didn't say anything LOL. -----Original Message----- From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Littlefield, Tyler Sent: Friday, July 22, 2011 9:55 AM To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: Need tutorials of VB6 I recommend you don't learn vb6 if this is your first language, but learn something that will help you and is more up-to-date. like vb.net. On 7/22/2011 7:42 AM, Chetan Sharma wrote:Hello Friends, I'm learning Visual Basic 6, There are number of tutorials available on the Internet, it is hard for me to choose good one. Can you help me to find good one? Because, there are many VB experts on the list and they know which one is better. With regards,
__________View the list's information and change your settings at //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
