[AccessD] Demise of VBA

One way around this is, you can call VB.Net code from VBA via a
net wrapper class and a comclass template, then just set a reference
to a .tlb to call it.  I should write up a sample.

The coming version VB 9 or Orcas has some interesting features.
the CLR has added support for nullable types in other words
you can have a null vale in a date or integer. This would
make it interesting passing values to VBA.

http://www.developer.com/net/vb/article.php/3618141



Charlotte Foust wrote:

>Ken,
>
>At present VSTO is included with VS.Net but it is also a stand alone
>product that includes a standard version of VB.Net.  It isn't cheap, by
>any means, but still cheaper than the full Visual Studio.   As for the
>ease of the transition, that depends on what you have done in Access.
>Have you worked with classes, child classes, loosely coupled code, ADO,
>frameworks?  If so, you aren't going to have a lot of trouble once you
>get used to the new object model.  The only thing that makes VB.Net
>easier to move to than C# is the lack of the pesky scope indicators and
>braces, etc., that makes languages like C# hard for VB programmers to
>decipher.
>
>I LIKE VB.Net and resist getting dragged back into VBA.  I wouldn't like
>to have had to make the transition on my own without a team member who
>was already conversant with VB.Net on hand to help, but I could have
>done it, as could most of us.  I remember similar discussions when VBA
>became the language of MS Office and we had to give up WordBasic,
>AccessBasic, Excel Macro language, etc.  
>
>As for alternatives, sure they're there, but if you want to keep the
>familiar Access interface, they're somewhat limited because VS.Net will
>be the scripting language for it.
>
>
>Charlotte Foust
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
>[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Kenneth
>Ismert
>Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2006 10:43 AM
>To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com
>Subject: Re: [AccessD] Demise of VBA
>
>
>VBA is a dead language -- I've been saying that for a while now. When
>Microsoft stops updating a product, it's only a matter of time before it
>sunsets it. 
>
>There are two driving reasons for this shift, as I see it:
>
>* VB6 and VBA have deep security issues. Microsoft is unwilling or
>unable to address this.
>
>* The VBA environment was included in Office, and Microsoft wants to
>realize extra revenue from the sale of VSTO.
>
>What does this mean for us?
>
>* Vastly more expensive entry into development. Very likely, VSTO will
>require a full version of Visual Studio -- no Express edition here.
>
>* Vastly higher learning curve. You thought the current system was
>tough? Try wrapping your head around a new language (don't believe the
>bullshit that VB.NET is any easier to move to than C#), new IDE,
>enormous new libraries (ADO.NET, BCL), and completely new methodologies.
>Not to mention the radically new Access 2007 interface. 
>
>My point is, if you have to re-learn everything, why limit yourself to
>just Visual Studio? There is a universe of languages and development
>evironments, all free, for you to explore. And, not crippled intro
>product -- full-featured and free. 
>
>You really owe it to yourself to explore the alternatives.
>
>-Ken
>--
>AccessD mailing list
>AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
>http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
>Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>  
>

-- 
Marty Connelly
Victoria, B.C.
Canada