What Damien said. C# syntax will be more familiar to java programmers,
but it's only the syntax. Under the hood VB.NET and C# are practically
identical. There are even plenty of tools available that will
translate code 1:1 from VB into C# and vice versa. The whole of
Grasshopper is written using both C# and VB and they cooperate
flawlessly. Whether or not it pays to learn it... hard to tell. It's a
big step for beginners, but you obviously do not fall into that
category.

Knowing C# is a great skill if you're a Rhino heavyweight. You'll be
able to write plugins for Rhino3/4/5 and beyond using high-quality,
free development environments as well as powerful standalone
applications. The implementation of C# and VB in Grasshopper is pretty
lame (especially compared to Visual Studio Express) so I definitely
advice you to download Express and learn inside that platform.

--
David Rutten
[email protected]
Robert McNeel & Associates



On Feb 8, 2:48 am, damien_alomar <[email protected]> wrote:
> It sounds like c# is probably going to be a better bet for you.  Java
> has a lot more in common with C style languages than it does with VB,
> so I think you'll be more familiar with it.  I don't think that C#
> really requires C++ as a prerequisite, so no issue there.  At this
> point, there's no practical difference between what can be done with
> C# and what can be done with VB.net.  There might be something that
> works better or easier in one or the other, but no gaps between the
> two.
>
> -Damien
>
> On Feb 7, 8:30 pm, Chris Wilkins <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Looking for quick education advice... Should I invest time in learning
> > vb or c# with grasshopper? I've spent a lot time with java and loved
> > it, and spent some bit of time with VB and care much less for it.
> > Never used c++, but wrote some c stuff in school. So considering that,
> > what do you guys suggest? Is the any difference in the available
> > libraries, etc., between the two languages, or other benefits of one
> > over the other?
>
> > Thanks,
> > Chris

Reply via email to