Creating Simple Utilities with Free Compilers

  • Thread starter Thread starter aychamo
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the use of free compilers for creating simple utilities to work with files. Participants explore options for programming environments, particularly focusing on VB.NET Express and the implications of using the .NET framework.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses a need for a simple utility and questions whether VB.NET Express, which utilizes .NET 2.0, is suitable for their requirements, given their preference to avoid .NET.
  • Another participant describes .NET as a more universal platform that facilitates code conversion between languages like VB and C#, but expresses a personal preference for earlier versions of Visual Studio.
  • There is a mention that VB.NET Express is designed to be user-friendly for beginners, although its capabilities are still uncertain to some participants.
  • Concerns are raised about the necessity for all users to have the same version of the .NET framework installed to run applications developed in .NET.
  • One participant clarifies that .NET requires a bytecode interpreter, similar to Java, which could restrict portability across platforms.
  • Another participant questions the backward compatibility of .NET 1.1 with .NET 2.0, expressing uncertainty about the framework's structure and usage.
  • There is a suggestion that alternatives like MONO or DotGNU could be used for .NET development on UNIX systems.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a mix of opinions regarding the use of .NET and VB.NET Express, with no clear consensus on its suitability or the implications of using the framework. Multiple competing views on the benefits and drawbacks of .NET remain unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty about the compatibility and functionality of different .NET versions, as well as the implications of using a framework that may restrict cross-platform development.

aychamo
Messages
375
Reaction score
0
Hey guys!

I need to write a few simple utilities for working with files. They are really basic. I just realized I don't even have a compiler! I know VisualBasic and Borland Delphi (so I'm practically worthless), but I don't have either compiler.

I saw that Microsoft offers VBNetExpress which is a free version of Visual Basic but it uses .NET2.0 which is beta? I wouldn't use anything related to .NET, I'd really only be shelling to command.com, running a few commands and analyzing some files and strings. That's it.

Can I program such simple things in VBNetExpress (I still don't even know what .NET is!)? Or is there any other free compiler that I could use for such a thing?

Thank you
Aychamo
 
Computer science news on Phys.org
.Net is a basically a new platform that is more "universal", for instance you can easily convert your code from VB to C#.
Visual studios which uses the .Net framework has a better graphical interface. Codewise, i just think it has become worse. It is a better environment for Windows development but i just don't like it as well as the previous visual studios.

I have read about VB.NET Express, not sure what it is yet but i have gotten the picture that it is a new environment for "dummies", making it easier to learn for newbies. Although i am not sure, they say that it should have full .Net capabilities so i reckon that it can become rather powerfull.
 
aychamo said:
Hey guys!

I need to write a few simple utilities for working with files. They are really basic. I just realized I don't even have a compiler! I know VisualBasic and Borland Delphi (so I'm practically worthless), but I don't have either compiler.

I saw that Microsoft offers VBNetExpress which is a free version of Visual Basic but it uses .NET2.0 which is beta? I wouldn't use anything related to .NET, I'd really only be shelling to command.com, running a few commands and analyzing some files and strings. That's it.

Can I program such simple things in VBNetExpress (I still don't even know what .NET is!)? Or is there any other free compiler that I could use for such a thing?

Thank you
Aychamo

Here: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/...43-7e4b-4622-86eb-95a22b832caa&displaylang=en

95/98/me have the WSH already installed (but not turned on). Enable the host just before you use it and disable it immediatly afterward.

Good Luck.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dilbert said:
for instance you can easily convert your code from VB to C#.

Actually the idea behind .NET is that you don't _need_ to convert code from one language to another since different languages interact seemlessly if if you follow CLS.
 
Don't forget that all the users that run your program need to have the same version of the .NET framework
 
dduardo said:
Don't forget that ...

Huh? What exactly do you mean?
 
It means, like java, you need to have the bytecode interpreter to run your .NET programs. Microsoft has basically locked you into their platform by programming in .NET.
 
I've heard that the VBNET.Express uses .NET 2.0 Beta or something. Do you think if I only used things that were in the .NET 1.1 it would be backward compatible?

I need to read up on .NET. I'm just not sure about it. I've seen some example code of people using .NET stuff and it is just a bunch of weird calls or something .. I don't know :)
 
dduardo said:
It means [...] you need to have the bytecode interpreter

Ah, OK. You scared me :) I thought you said something about versions and you were actually talking about the virtual machine. Sorry, but I'm not a mind reader.

dduardo said:
Microsoft has basically locked you into their platform by programming in .NET

If you want to develop using .NET on UNIX you can always use MONO or DotGNU.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K