Is Visual Basic a good beginner's language?

[iago]

I fully agree.  Maybe it helps separate the sucky programmers from the good programmers!   If someone has been working with nothing but Visual Basic for 6 years, chances are they're a sucky programmer.

What if that person doesn't realize that there's something better out there?

[Sidoh]

What if that person doesn't realize that there's something better out there?

How likely is that?

[Warrior]

I'm going to say it's a bad beginners language. It teaches some bad habbits which will be hard to get rid of in the future.
Sure it's useful for writing some applications quickly but it's limitations and the bad habbits it encourages outweighs it's usefulness.
Those are my thoughts

[Sidoh]

I'm going to say it's a bad beginners language. It teaches some bad habbits which will be hard to get rid of in the future.
Sure it's useful for writing some applications quickly but it's limitations and the bad habbits it encourages outweighs it's usefulness.
Those are my thoughts

Like I said, if the programmer is any good, they'll realize that other programming languages are going to be different.  Good programmers can adapt from one language to the next nearly seamlessly.  If the said person is using Visual Basic and wants to learn another language, all it takes is the willingness to learn, an open mind and some time for practice.

[iago]

I actually forgot to bring this up:

It's a great language. For what it's designed to do. Compared to other languages, it isn't very useful.

That absolutely wasn't the question.  I don't care if it does what it's designed to do, or even that it isn't useful.  This thread is about whether it's a good beginner language

[Warrior]

I'm going to say it's a bad beginners language. It teaches some bad habbits which will be hard to get rid of in the future.
Sure it's useful for writing some applications quickly but it's limitations and the bad habbits it encourages outweighs it's usefulness.
Those are my thoughts

Like I said, if the programmer is any good, they'll realize that other programming languages are going to be different.  Good programmers can adapt from one language to the next nearly seamlessly.  If the said person is using Visual Basic and wants to learn another language, all it takes is the willingness to learn, an open mind and some time for practice.

Agreed, but I do think it's possible to "Save" those who will be hopelessly lost when trying to go beyond VB (and endup giving up) by giving them a good language.

[Sidoh]

Agreed, but I do think it's possible to "Save" those who will be hopelessly lost when trying to go beyond VB (and endup giving up) by giving them a good language.

Perhaps I'm implying that's a good thing?

[Warrior]

Ouch, there's always hope. :/ I've seen people rise from the ashes, hell look at me in '03 @ vL. Using VB6 (when I didn't know it) and CSB (I hardly knew that either)

[Sidoh]

Ouch, there's always hope. :/ I've seen people rise from the ashes, hell look at me in '03 @ vL. Using VB6 (when I didn't know it) and CSB (I hardly knew that either)

Obviously, you had potential.  The people we're talking about don't.

[Warrior]

Possibly, maybe they do too!
Anyhow despite what I think, users should decide on what they feel confortable and what their goals are with programming.

[igimo1]

There are several bad habits that people pick up. 

The major one I see is total lack of error handling.  A VB programmer will use "on error resume" on everything, then move to C and do nothing.  I admit that Java has the same issue (.... throws Exception), but at least the program generally ends and the programmer realizes that he's an idiot. 

False. Merely having a function in that language that lets users jump errors means absolutely nothing; most VB6 coders I know have enough sense to debug their errors instead of ignoring them.  It's just something you shouldn't use, like voids.

[Sidoh]

False. Merely having a function in that language that lets users jump errors means absolutely nothing; most VB6 coders I know have enough sense to debug their errors instead of ignoring them.  It's just something you shouldn't use, like voids.

You don't know very many Visual Basic programmers, if that's the case.  It's much easier to just slap something together in VB than it is in, say, C.

[MyndFyre]

False. Merely having a function in that language that lets users jump errors means absolutely nothing; most VB6 coders I know have enough sense to debug their errors instead of ignoring them.  It's just something you shouldn't use, like voids.

You don't know very many Visual Basic programmers, if that's the case.  It's much easier to just slap something together in VB than it is in, say, C.

That's what VB was made for! 

It's just something you shouldn't use, like voids.

What?!?

[Sidoh]

That's what VB was made for! 

And that's why it's easy to create sloppy code with it.

[iago]

There are several bad habits that people pick up. 

The major one I see is total lack of error handling.  A VB programmer will use "on error resume" on everything, then move to C and do nothing.  I admit that Java has the same issue (.... throws Exception), but at least the program generally ends and the programmer realizes that he's an idiot. 

False. Merely having a function in that language that lets users jump errors means absolutely nothing; most VB6 coders I know have enough sense to debug their errors instead of ignoring them.  It's just something you shouldn't use, like voids.

I see plenty of VB programmers who don't handle errors properly, who just stick "on error resume" if they have one.  Even I used to do that all those years ago.  Half-assed error handling is so very tempting. 

And wtf @ voids?  I'm not sure whether you mean void functions or void* pointers, but they are both useful.  Lately I've gotten into the habit of making most of my void functions BOOL so that they can indicate errors, but void still has its place.