VB (.NET) = Stupefying every programmatic element...
C++ = a great language, enough said...
C++ = a great language, enough said...
VB OR C++??
<3 people that take managed code as "stupid". In the end employers want RAD (rapid application development), it generates more profit as they don't have to pay coders for as long and their software can get on the market faster. Sure C++ can go more low level, but the integration with the .NET framework found in C# and VB.NET trumps it in terms of development speed for most applications. There are benefits to both, obviously, I'm not saying C++ is a bad language, never have. I just don't like people that say .NET/Managed is worse that unmanaged when it clearly does have benefits. If you want more in depth detail please refer to Jetamay's thread in this section. I'll dig up the link.
http://www.mpgh.net/forum/27-coders-...framework.html
/rant.
http://www.mpgh.net/forum/27-coders-...framework.html
/rant.
Originally Posted by Jason
<3 people that take managed code as "stupid". In the end employers want RAD (rapid application development), it generates more profit as they don't have to pay coders for as long and their software can get on the market faster. Sure C++ can go more low level, but the integration with the .NET framework found in C# and VB.NET trumps it in terms of development speed for most applications. There are benefits to both, obviously, I'm not saying C++ is a bad language, never have. I just don't like people that say .NET/Managed is worse that unmanaged when it clearly does have benefits. If you want more in depth detail please refer to Jetamay's thread in this section. I'll dig up the link.
http://www.mpgh.net/forum/27-coders-...framework.html
/rant.
http://www.mpgh.net/forum/27-coders-...framework.html
/rant.
Managed code is bad, not only for programming knowledge, but for security of the application.
It's easy to decompile a .net application, but have you tried with a native program?
Originally Posted by VirtualDUDE
Alright lets not turn this into a big discussion, please.
Managed code is bad, not only for programming knowledge, but for security of the application.
It's easy to decompile a .net application, but have you tried with a native program?
Managed code is bad, not only for programming knowledge, but for security of the application.
It's easy to decompile a .net application, but have you tried with a native program?
Originally Posted by Jason
Obfuscation and encryption. Ever heard of them?
Originally Posted by VirtualDUDE
Decrypting and de-obfuscating code..Ever heard of that?
Originally Posted by freedompeace
I'd recommend him VB rather than C#, lol.
vb is way easier to begin 
Originally Posted by Hell_Demon
Why would you recommend VB over C#? The only reason I can think of would be liking it up the butthole, which I hope isn't true for you ._.
Originally Posted by VirtualDUDE
Alright lets not turn this into a big discussion, please.
Managed code is bad, not only for programming knowledge, but for security of the application.
It's easy to decompile a .net application, but have you tried with a native program?
Managed code is bad, not only for programming knowledge, but for security of the application.
It's easy to decompile a .net application, but have you tried with a native program?
Would you also like to conclude that because managed code simplifies programming (and is therefore bad), C++ must also be bad because it simplifies programming, relative to assembly? You must then also then conclude that ASM is bad because it simplifies real hardware coding at the bit level.
Originally Posted by VirtualDUDE
Decrypting and de-obfuscating code..Ever heard of that?
Originally Posted by freedompeace
Because VB is easier for many people to learn? I started with VB back in early '10 =P
"Managed code is bad, not only for programming knowledge, but for security of the application."
Would you also like to conclude that because managed code simplifies programming (and is therefore bad), C++ must also be bad because it simplifies programming, relative to assembly? You must then also then conclude that ASM is bad because it simplifies real hardware coding at the bit level.
So... Since Microsoft Windows, Adobe Master Collection and Combat Arms (lol) have been decrypted and had their protection removed (deobfuscated), it must mean they're managed? (but the very beliefe that managed == interpreted + metadata full is wrong anyway)
Originally Posted by VirtualDUDE
Thank you sir. You officially made me laugh.....Next time, don't even bother replying...
Originally Posted by Hassan
LOL. Why you mad tho ?
Originally Posted by Nathan
Just stop talking to him
Originally Posted by VirtualDUDE
Cookie, you are probably the most logical person on this forum, that I've met. Grats
@cookie, to know how a "PC" works, you would need to know how all the hardware works, to know how programming languages interact with the PC you would need to know machine language, on the same note, you would need to know machine language to suicide. Get yo shit straight
About your schpiel on de-obfuscation, so what? If someone is 100% determined, they can crack a program, native or managed is irrelevant, please stop spouting shit.
Originally Posted by Jason
Taking your pc apart with a screwdriver is for when you want to know how your pc works
)), but you don't see how they work,And taking apart your computer isn't a programming language.