Comments on: Getting Started in VBA http://www.dailydoseofexcel.com/archives/2009/11/30/getting-started-in-vba/ Daily posts of Excel tips…and other stuff Thu, 09 Feb 2012 23:42:03 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Rob van Gelder http://www.dailydoseofexcel.com/archives/2009/11/30/getting-started-in-vba/#comment-42529 Rob van Gelder Thu, 03 Dec 2009 06:12:00 +0000 http://www.dailydoseofexcel.com/?p=3304#comment-42529 <p>Dennis: you're probably right to disagree. I guess I'm showing my ignorance as I'm not exposed to the VB.NET side of the fence.<br> I chose my language and stuck with it, and the two worlds I live in (C# and Excel) haven't yet met in the way I want.</p> Dennis: you’re probably right to disagree. I guess I’m showing my ignorance as I’m not exposed to the VB.NET side of the fence.
I chose my language and stuck with it, and the two worlds I live in (C# and Excel) haven’t yet met in the way I want.

]]> By: Dennis Wallentin http://www.dailydoseofexcel.com/archives/2009/11/30/getting-started-in-vba/#comment-42513 Dennis Wallentin Wed, 02 Dec 2009 11:37:00 +0000 http://www.dailydoseofexcel.com/?p=3304#comment-42513 <p>The only reason why C# 4.0 is improved in this area is the fact that C# (and F#) is the preferred language at MSFT. </p> <p>For the native Office developer VB.NET is more of interest as it's closer to VBA then what C# will ever be. Yes, VB.NET 10.0 comes with some great news as well. In VS 2010 the PIAs have been much improved and therefore is a less PIA for You ;) </p> <br> <br> <p>After spending the last 4-5 years with Excel & .NET I have to disagree. The keyword to work with Excel & .NET is knowledge and many developers have not taken the time to get it.</p> <p>Kind regards,<br> Dennis</p> The only reason why C# 4.0 is improved in this area is the fact that C# (and F#) is the preferred language at MSFT.

For the native Office developer VB.NET is more of interest as it’s closer to VBA then what C# will ever be. Yes, VB.NET 10.0 comes with some great news as well. In VS 2010 the PIAs have been much improved and therefore is a less PIA for You ;)

After spending the last 4-5 years with Excel & .NET I have to disagree. The keyword to work with Excel & .NET is knowledge and many developers have not taken the time to get it.

Kind regards,
Dennis

]]> By: Rob van Gelder http://www.dailydoseofexcel.com/archives/2009/11/30/getting-started-in-vba/#comment-42505 Rob van Gelder Wed, 02 Dec 2009 05:33:00 +0000 http://www.dailydoseofexcel.com/?p=3304#comment-42505 <p>The current version of C# doesn't have optional parameters, so if you want to call, say, Workbook.Open, you need to supply a value for every parameter, even if you dont intend to use them. You have to supply Missing.Value for each parameter placeholder.<br> In order to reduce the parameter count, you'd need to write your own wrapper specific to each use of the method.</p> <p>Excel talks COM, so is nasty to program against with C#. I think it gets easier with VB.NET, but I haven't had a go.<br> COM has a big history, and to date .NET has been giving it the cold shoulder. PIAs exist (which btw I feel is an appropriate acronym) but it's not the same development experience as with .NET.</p> <p>A couple of articules describing the change...<br> <a href="http://www.devx.com/dotnet/Article/42590" rel="nofollow">http://www.devx.com/dotnet/Article/42590</a><br> <a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/samng/archive/2009/06/16/com-interop-in-c-4-0.aspx" rel="nofollow">http://blogs.msdn.com/samng/archive/2009/06/16/com-interop-in-c-4-0.aspx</a></p> The current version of C# doesn’t have optional parameters, so if you want to call, say, Workbook.Open, you need to supply a value for every parameter, even if you dont intend to use them. You have to supply Missing.Value for each parameter placeholder.
In order to reduce the parameter count, you’d need to write your own wrapper specific to each use of the method.

Excel talks COM, so is nasty to program against with C#. I think it gets easier with VB.NET, but I haven’t had a go.
COM has a big history, and to date .NET has been giving it the cold shoulder. PIAs exist (which btw I feel is an appropriate acronym) but it’s not the same development experience as with .NET.

A couple of articules describing the change…
http://www.devx.com/dotnet/Article/42590
http://blogs.msdn.com/samng/archive/2009/06/16/com-interop-in-c-4-0.aspx

]]> By: Doug Glancy http://www.dailydoseofexcel.com/archives/2009/11/30/getting-started-in-vba/#comment-42504 Doug Glancy Wed, 02 Dec 2009 01:57:00 +0000 http://www.dailydoseofexcel.com/?p=3304#comment-42504 <p>Rob, I'll admit I don't know what you mean. Care to expand?</p> Rob, I’ll admit I don’t know what you mean. Care to expand?

]]> By: Doug Jenkins http://www.dailydoseofexcel.com/archives/2009/11/30/getting-started-in-vba/#comment-42499 Doug Jenkins Tue, 01 Dec 2009 22:33:00 +0000 http://www.dailydoseofexcel.com/?p=3304#comment-42499 <p>So are Microsoft actually getting the message that lack of decent VBA support is an effective barrier to adoption of Open Office?</p> So are Microsoft actually getting the message that lack of decent VBA support is an effective barrier to adoption of Open Office?

]]> By: Rob van Gelder http://www.dailydoseofexcel.com/archives/2009/11/30/getting-started-in-vba/#comment-42487 Rob van Gelder Tue, 01 Dec 2009 07:23:00 +0000 http://www.dailydoseofexcel.com/?p=3304#comment-42487 <p>While I like VBA, I'd prefer to develop my macros, user defined functions, etc. with C#<br> I'm looking at C# 4.0 Optional Parameters as the Missing.Value piece of the puzzle. If you know what I mean...</p> While I like VBA, I’d prefer to develop my macros, user defined functions, etc. with C#
I’m looking at C# 4.0 Optional Parameters as the Missing.Value piece of the puzzle. If you know what I mean…

]]>