Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by michaeljchou | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

michaeljchou

.Net is open source

View on HN

Be nice if they could open source VB6 though, which hasn't had an update in 19 years.

I'm still using it, which makes me happy and sad at the same time.

That isn't .NET. :)

But yeah, I wish they'd open source VB6 too. There were some fond memories back there. I have some old programs I can't find components for online too, which are somewhere in the old VB6 install. There's play potential, even if I have no real practical need for it.

And it's hard to imagine that open sourcing VB6 would harm Microsoft's business in any way.

Just wanted to say that I too would love to mess about with the VB6 (and previous) code base. I can't see any commercial reasons that could prevent this. Only thing I can think of is that it might give VB6 another lease of life where they want to properly retire it.

Said it before and I'll say it again, I don't think there is anything out there now that was a productive as VB6 development. Rapid Application Development was the buzzword of the day, and it really stood up to the name.

Oh, that would be pretty neat if they would open source VB6 or any previous version. I wrote a bunch of that code (like the VBX interface for example) and it would be fun to see it again.

It would be awesome. I know of some clients that would pay decent money to keep their VB6 apps running, if we had the source I'd happily be able to provide that service. Some of the DCOM+ stuff I wrote back in the day is still used in production as it just works. And it works really well.

VB6 was awesome. Would be great if they could release it as open source.

RAD (rapid application development) of GUI applications was never easier and such a joy then with VB6. I remember I was very sad when they announced their vision for dotNet - it took them additional four years until dotNet was available in v1. In the meantime they lost all developers to HTML and PHP & co. Dreamweaver WYSIWYG was good enough.

Good point. I knew some people that moved to Delphi after VB5, which I always kicked myself for not doing. However, I look back at the apps I worked on and there was nothing there that that would look out of place today. Like any language, you can write messy code and design poor UI, but follow principles such as MVP, separate your data layer and such, it's still a good platform. Having said that, I'd not pick it for a new project today! I've fallen very hard for C#.

I don't really think VB6 has any chance at "another lease on life". It's missing way too many things that are a modern expectation today, and I think it's unlikely that open source contribution would build enough in to make it viable. (Especially if Microsoft didn't accept PRs, so there was no "official" open source project around updating it.)

But for people who have to support VB6 regardless of whether or not Microsoft open sources it, I'm sure it'd be pretty helpful.

We still have stuff out there that runs on COBOL, I have a feeling there will still be some life-dependent VB6 code out there somewhere in 2050.

I don't expect MS to ever open source it at this stage. For many years the biggest source of angst for those of us marooned in VB6 was the fear that our applications would no longer run in the 'next' version of windows and rewrites would be necessary. I don't think that fear is there any longer as each successive release has continued to support them. Now it's just slightly depressing to be working with a tool that was already due an update before the end of the last century.

I think Windows 10 still ships the VB runtime, but I'll go and check. Support I've come across it mainly down to third party components, be it some weird DLL or an ActiveX control that will not behave. A plain vanilla VB6 app that you might get as an ePos system or some internal CRUD tool should work 'just fine'.

Thinking about it, I am going to dig out my old VB6 VM image and have a play. Be interesting to see how many people out there would want support for VB6 apps today.

I heard about some reasons why open-sourcing software is a little difficult when MS open-sourced Windows LiveWriter as Open Live Writer. The reasoning is that a lot of the code/supporting tools that they use have non-permissive licenses and is also reused in other places which makes it an involved process to decouple it from the application. A good example is the Ribbon interface in OLW (which I think Scott Hanselman or someone got rewritten so that it could be open-sourced.).

Don't quote me on this though, because I wasn't a first party member of the conversations.

No, it's not. .net is more than .net core, and it's not 100% open, nor cross-platform.

The .Net Framework CANNOT be cross platform, it contains all of the Windows specific parts. The whole point of the .Net Core initiative is to pull out the OS agnostic parts and to rewrite other parts to be cross platform (e.g. A GDI-free System.Drawing[0]).

The long term plan from what I've read is for .Net Core to eventually form the foundation of the .Net Framework, then the Framework (Windows/GDI+/COM+/etc) libraries with be built on top with other OS-specific libraries being created for other platforms.

The vast majority of the .Net framework is already Open Source[1] including the compiler[2]. What in particular are you missing that you need?

[0] https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/dotnet/2017/01/19/net-core-...

[1] https://github.com/Microsoft/referencesource

[2] https://github.com/dotnet/roslyn

I don't really care if it can or cannot be. I just said it's not, at this time. Nobody knows what will happen in 20 or 50 years. As simple as that.

As simple as what? The vast majority of .Net is open source along with the compiler.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com