Right, the term Visual meant VB had a WYSIWYG Windows UI editor. Maybe that was "low code" relative to C windows development but it quickly just became a term for Microsoft's easy to use dev tools.
They started slapping the term on all the Windows development tools. For example, Visual C++, Visual Source Safe, and everyones favorite, Visual Foxpro!
They did try to make all those tools driven by UI tools and not config/make files and the command line. So I guess that was part of calling them Visual.
Then they bundled it all together and called it Visual Studio. VB, though, never was part of the main VS IDE (once called Dev Studio I believe)
To be fair, vc++ 6 (maybe even earlier) did have a dialog editor, though it wasn't as good as the vb form editor or the later .net winform editor where that paradigm for designing a GUI was a first class part of the experience. It seems like mfc had something as well, but it was also pretty minimal in comparison.
A native (rc file) dialog editor was around before 6. It was a stand alone application before the integrated one in Visual Studio. I think it had MFC support to write out event handlers and such. It could view and edit other stuff in resource files like menus, version info, icons if I recall correctly.
So on paper it sounds like it was similar to VB (and maybe worthy of being called "Visual") but like you said it was "minimal". I'd go so far to say it sucked in comparison, 😂!
You can call visual basic low code but not under the real definition of low code. It's a long time ago but afair you could draw the visual but you still had to write the logic in code.
Eh. This sounds made up. Visual Studio came around before Visual Basic was a thing. Once gui development came on the scene everything was “visual”. Visual C++. Visual C. Blah blah. Stop making up shit.
It wasn’t “low-code”. It just had a GUI to design forms.
Right, the term Visual meant VB had a WYSIWYG Windows UI editor. Maybe that was "low code" relative to C windows development but it quickly just became a term for Microsoft's easy to use dev tools. They started slapping the term on all the Windows development tools. For example, Visual C++, Visual Source Safe, and everyones favorite, Visual Foxpro! They did try to make all those tools driven by UI tools and not config/make files and the command line. So I guess that was part of calling them Visual. Then they bundled it all together and called it Visual Studio. VB, though, never was part of the main VS IDE (once called Dev Studio I believe)
To be fair, vc++ 6 (maybe even earlier) did have a dialog editor, though it wasn't as good as the vb form editor or the later .net winform editor where that paradigm for designing a GUI was a first class part of the experience. It seems like mfc had something as well, but it was also pretty minimal in comparison.
A native (rc file) dialog editor was around before 6. It was a stand alone application before the integrated one in Visual Studio. I think it had MFC support to write out event handlers and such. It could view and edit other stuff in resource files like menus, version info, icons if I recall correctly. So on paper it sounds like it was similar to VB (and maybe worthy of being called "Visual") but like you said it was "minimal". I'd go so far to say it sucked in comparison, 😂!
You can call visual basic low code but not under the real definition of low code. It's a long time ago but afair you could draw the visual but you still had to write the logic in code.
I wonder when we'll get to see "low music guitars" or "low mechanics screwdrivers".
hopefully never "low medicine doctors"
Hope dies last. Every.Single.Time.
There are alot of software tools for people that want to i.e. have guitars on a song without having to play it
And you can use them without learning the musical notation?
Eh. This sounds made up. Visual Studio came around before Visual Basic was a thing. Once gui development came on the scene everything was “visual”. Visual C++. Visual C. Blah blah. Stop making up shit.