Pointy-haird bosses
-
The Grand Negus wrote:
Does .NET make development faster?
More productive? Perhaps, assuming that you throw out all the Macros, development tools, and libs that I've used in the past for C/C++. I'd be interested in a real case study on this myself. I've read numerous things where people state that they are more productive with .net. I'd love to read a paper that quantifies their findings.
My Blog A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects. - -Lazarus Long
-
The Grand Negus wrote:
Well, does it? If so, how much faster? If not, what good is it?
No, IMO, it does not. I've had to implement, override or re-implement just about every critical element that .NET supposedly handles for me in order to get a stable and/or usable application. Communications, remoting, UI, USB, database (except for primitives like connection and DataTable classes), etc. The only thing I like about .NET is reflection, and that's not actually a .NET thing, but a language feature. Conversely, it doesn't take more time, IMO, than, say a C++ app. And I refuse to touch MFC anymore. In many ways, it was worse than .NET. So what good is it? It's a tool, but if I'd known then what I know now, I probably wouldn't have switched from C++ and I would have figured out a way (of which there are a variety of options) to implement reflection-like features in C++. Marc
People are just notoriously impossible. --DavidCrow
There's NO excuse for not commenting your code. -- John Simmons / outlaw programmer
People who say that they will refactor their code later to make it "good" don't understand refactoring, nor the art and craft of programming. -- Josh Smith -
The Grand Negus wrote:
schoolgirls".
Care to explain that remark?
__________________ Bob is my homeboy.
-
The Grand Negus wrote:
Well, does it?
Yes it does.
The Grand Negus wrote:
If so, how much faster?
2-5 times faster than developing in c++, vb 6.0, foxpro, dbase, pascal, classic asp, java. Its relative to the software you want to compare with. Just drag and drop couple of buttons, textboxes, labels, listview and write some events and you have a form ready, imagine this same thing in c++ or java. You will have to write at least 5-6 times the code to draw these forms, buttons, listview and other stuff.
The Grand Negus wrote:
If not, what good is it?
(4 million members - you) think its good :).
Tarakeshwar Reddy wrote:
Just drag and drop couple of buttons, textboxes, labels, listview and write some events and you have a form ready
:wtf::omg: You make me want to switch sides in this argument X| But don't mind me continue on with your drag n drop it's all good mentality.
led mike
-
Given that I'm ignorant of what you are working on, I still hazard a guess that it is the availability of libraries and third party products that makes the difference. Not the actual language. But for some that is just semantics. :)
Chris Meech I am Canadian. [heard in a local bar]
Your guess is pretty much spot-on. Socket programming and thread management is significantly easier in .NET than it is in C++ - I'm working on the server-side state machine for a Windows-based processing control program.
Cheers, Patrick
-
So a schoolboy who dislikes someone because they are smaller, a different race, chubby, etc. that's considered a higher standard that girls who dislike another girl because she is pretty, gets good grades, has nicer clothes, etc? You should read articles that discuss the rise of girl bullies.
__________________ Bob is my homeboy.
-
It really depends on how much you have invested in the language/framework you're leaving and what type of work you wish to do. Just as how MFC speeded development for some applications verses win32 so too does .NET speed development. For me, I can develop faster in .NET. But you still have to write your application. Sounds like what Mark was originally referring to was that the pointy haired boss expected .NET to write the app for them. Almost anything UI is faster than win32 or MFC, but again, it depends on how much you have invested. If you've coded your own library around win32 that allows you similiar advantages then it might not be faster. But with the IDE the gain is almost offset by the poor performance of the IDE.
This statement was never false.
-
Yeah, it is a little reasonable considering that in the past you've used these simple questions as a segue into PE. There is a point to your question after all isn't there? The overwhelming complexity and mass of anything MS? Call me wrong if you wish but you've set a track record with this.
This statement was never false.
-
Very significant. Under .NET compared to MFC under windows and even with regard to windows services, COM interop, etc, I'm about twice as productive. Alot of that is due to what's supplied in this API. MFC wasn't as robust or as well organized. COM interop is way easier. Threading is easier. Sockets is easier. All of this enables me to double my production. And what's funny is that I was writing my own C++ library wrapping win32 to do all of this, and found that .NET and C# actually supplied it for me out of the box. So its already packaged according to how I think. Seriously, I wrote my own version of the delegate before I realized .NET supplied it.
This statement was never false.
-
Your guess is pretty much spot-on. Socket programming and thread management is significantly easier in .NET than it is in C++ - I'm working on the server-side state machine for a Windows-based processing control program.
Cheers, Patrick
Exactly. Wrote a handy asynchronous transaction server in two days. Would have been a few hours, but I needed it to be a bit robust, with dynamic transaction handlers that are loaded on the back end so that the whole process could be data driven.
This statement was never false.
-
Yeah, it is a little reasonable considering that in the past you've used these simple questions as a segue into PE. There is a point to your question after all isn't there? The overwhelming complexity and mass of anything MS? Call me wrong if you wish but you've set a track record with this.
This statement was never false.
-
The Grand Negus wrote:
Only fools and charlatans that don't want things accounted for.
I see the period, but I just can't believe that this sentence is finished. :laugh:
This statement was never false.
-
The Grand Negus wrote:
In this case is was more about Microsoft making everyone learn something that wasn't really better, just different. It sounds though, that .NET can be somewhat better for some folks and some things. But it general, it's probably more change for the sake of change, or six of one, a half dozen of the other.
Thats not true, its wasn't a change for the sake of change! The CLR provide tremendous advantages to programmers who choose to use it. What are these advantages you ask? The answers can be found here, here, and here.
█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██
-
The Grand Negus wrote:
In this case is was more about Microsoft making everyone learn something that wasn't really better, just different. It sounds though, that .NET can be somewhat better for some folks and some things. But it general, it's probably more change for the sake of change, or six of one, a half dozen of the other.
Thats not true, its wasn't a change for the sake of change! The CLR provide tremendous advantages to programmers who choose to use it. What are these advantages you ask? The answers can be found here, here, and here.
█▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒██████▒█▒██ █▒█████▒▒▒▒▒█ █▒▒▒▒▒██▒█▒██
Captain See Sharp wrote:
The CLR provide tremendous advantages to programmers who choose to use it.
Dammit, Cap'n! I don't have time for all that! I need a library that'll provide tremendous advantages even when i don't use it! ;)
----
i hope you are feeling sleepy for people not calling you by the same.
--BarnaKol on abusive words
-
The Grand Negus wrote:
Well, does it?
Yes! For certain types of applications it does e.g. database apps, simple forms app, web apps. This compared to the same development work in C++/MFC/ISAPI.
The Grand Negus wrote:
If so, how much faster?
Anywhere between 0-300%. Why? IDE support, care free programming for memory allocations (no need to worry about memory allocations and allocating responsibility to classes for managing memory), Reflection and dynamic code generation. These 4 immediately come to mind.
Rama Krishna Vavilala wrote:
care free programming for memory allocations (no need to worry about memory allocations and allocating responsibility to classes for managing memory)
I love .NET and find it a great help, but alas, your statement is not 100% true. :sigh: http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/07/01/ManagedLeaks/default.aspx also: http://www.agilekiwi.com/memory_leaks.htm http://blogs.msdn.com/larryosterman/archive/2004/05/19/135211.aspx http://blogs.msdn.com/brada/archive/2003/04/26/50013.aspx
WE ARE DYSLEXIC OF BORG. Refutance is systile. Your a$$ will be laminated.
-
Personally it's not just the speed increase due to not having to worry about memory management, Unicode issues, cross-laguage issues or a library that isn't broad enough - it's things like reflection that allows improved debugging, error reporting, and development tools; A better base class library so you're not spending as much time reinventing things; cleaner language syntax and the no-memory management and inherent security that mean maintenance, debugging, extensions and getting new developers up to speed on old code that are all faster and easier.
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
-
If(Negus.Question==Question.Rhetorically.Ignorant) { Net.Develop.Compile>EnglishOnly.Develop.Compile )
"We are all repositories for genetically-encoded information that we're all spreading back and forth amongst each other, all the time. We're just lousy with information." - Neal Stephenson