Re: Need tutorials of VB6

  • From: David Tseng <davidct1209@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011 15:17:42 -0700

Catherine,

Though I think the goal is a great one (if you want to implement your
own voice chat service for example), you might want to start with
something more useful as a building block.

You should probably pick a platform/language and get to know it *very*
well.  This means to me becoming comfortable with the language in it
of itself perhaps with minimal use of a command line to drive your
programs.  This also includes understanding the languages features,
syntax, symantics, object-orientedness, control flow, packaging,
standard libs, etc.  For .Net this could take some time :), but it's
worth it to do this part "right" and spend the necessary hours/months
to get it.

Thereafter, you can look into implementing web services.  This does
require lots of knowledge about how the internet relays traffic via
various layered protocol's.  I find it useful to understand the
"atoms" of the system.  In unix, for example, http servers are largely
built upon BSD styled sockets and via low-level system calls.  Having
that picture of exactly what's going on when an http request goes from
a browser down to hardware across the wire to another machine and
eventually resulting in a response is sort of what you're after.
Without that kind of grounding, you'll just throw out T.L.A.'s without
understanding them and coding up such a project would become quickly
an exercise in stabbing in the dark as it were.



On 7/22/11, Katherine Moss <Katherine.Moss@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Implementing custom protocols might be something down the line for me, but
> the huge question is where to start and what to learn first to get it to
> work properly.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Christopher
> Coale
> Sent: Friday, July 22, 2011 6:02 PM
> To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: Need tutorials of VB6
>
> I'm not very experienced without any kind of telephony protocols; however,
> if .NET doesn't offer support for a specific protocol that just means you
> have two choices: download a library that implements it, or implement the
> protocol yourself.
>
> On 7/22/2011 2:57 PM, Katherine Moss wrote:
>> I know this, but the .net framework offers no classes for the protocols
>> STUN, RTP, or SIP, I don't think.  Does it?  And the problem, most CIP
>> software seems to require a softphone and a number to connect to it rather
>> than being based on user name/ID and password to talk or IM with it.  I'd
>> have to first extend the .net framework, right?
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
>> Christopher Coale
>> Sent: Friday, July 22, 2011 5:22 PM
>> To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: Re: Need tutorials of VB6
>>
>> There's no reason you can't. ;)
>>
>> On 7/22/2011 2:18 PM, Katherine Moss wrote:
>>> I was thinking more like a Skype-ish clone.  Something like that but with
>>> an open protocol.
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
>>> Christopher Coale
>>> Sent: Friday, July 22, 2011 5:16 PM
>>> To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Subject: Re: Need tutorials of VB6
>>>
>>> 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
>>>> c++ 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
>>>
>>> __________
>>> View the list's information and change your settings at
>>> //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
>>>
>> __________
>> View the list's information and change your settings at
>> //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
>>
>> __________
>> View the list's information and change your settings at
>> //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
>>
>
> __________
> View the list's information and change your settings at
> //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
>
> __________
> View the list's information and change your settings at
> //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
>
>
__________
View the list's information and change your settings at 
//www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. programmingblind
  3. Archive
  4. 07-2011