# Visual Basic structure ?

This topic is 4964 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

## Recommended Posts

is Visual Basic 6 to C as Visual Basic. NET is to C#
(modular)            (object-oriented)


##### Share on other sites
i guess so, but its kinda off..

VB6 -> VB.NET
C -> C++ ->C#

##### Share on other sites
You're pretty close. VB.NET and C# v1.0 and v1.1 are fairly similar in their feature sets.

As for the VB6 comparison, I'd probably compare it to Pascal instead of C...

##### Share on other sites
Aye, the fellow who said it's closer to Pascal is right on.

VB 6 was actually object oriented, but in the same way that Quasimodo was a human. That is to say, it is, but it's distorted so that most people couldn't tell off the bat.

In fact, in some ways, VB6 had stronger support for high-level OO design concepts than C++ did. Its natural inclination was toward the Event-Driven Architecture commonly associated with OO. You had the potential to use interface inheritence (though not implementation inheritence, which is the main crippling effect of VB6 in my opinion). It had a robust (IMHO, the most robust in its time) support for the blossoming concept of Component Programming. And so on.

But VB6 didn't have inheritence of implementation, the ability to override or overload methods, and it had some code hiding that made certain tasks more difficult than one would desire them to be (threaded programming, for instance: you had to use the Win32 API, and there were some functions that you had to avoid entirely).

Anyways though, I would indeed agree with the VB6 : Pascal as VB.NET : C#... but if you only want to compare C languages, VB6 is somewhere between the original C and C++, and leaning far more heavily toward C++ than C.

• ### What is your GameDev Story?

In 2019 we are celebrating 20 years of GameDev.net! Share your GameDev Story with us.

• 9
• 9
• 10
• 11
• 13
• ### Forum Statistics

• Total Topics
634094
• Total Posts
3015470
×