Pointy-haird bosses
-
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
-
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
-
Although i came late on this discussion, but i do agree with your point , ofcourse we programmer, only see things in the surface and instantly take our manager as complete morons, but most of the time they have a practical point of view, though not technical but that does NOT make them less experienced or stupid. I myself am a big fan of my supervisor who became VP last month. His questions also looked silly a number of times but eventually i am able to see the point. It was a such a lovely discussion, i hope to see you more in the lounge. there are so many things to learn
Omit Needless Words - Strunk, William, Jr.
Vista? Cryptography Next Generation (CNG) here
-
hahaha , that was the best reply i have ever heard , reminds me of Mr. Feynman
Omit Needless Words - Strunk, William, Jr.
Vista? Cryptography Next Generation (CNG) here
-
Well about your question
The Grand Negus wrote:
Well, does it? If so, how much faster? If not, what good is it?
I would say NO !
The Grand Negus wrote:
If not, what good is it?
Still its good at two fronts Desktop application (windows) and Web 1. Due to the monopoly of MS , .Net comes with set of classes to use the features of Windows directly. Some of the benefits for web (also applies to windows) i can think of are 1. Creating a robust application compared to old technologies 2. Implementation of advanced technologies like security etc is easier 3. Integrated Development Environment (IDE) helps a lot during designing and development 4. Helps you to implement a complete object oriented approach, which again helps in maintenance and extensibilty of the application
Omit Needless Words - Strunk, William, Jr.
Vista? Cryptography Next Generation (CNG) here
-
The Grand Negus wrote:
Did you know or study under Feynman?
I have read a number of his books, and i think whoever will read his books, will know him :) I only wished i could have been that lucky to have studied under him. Have you ? By any chance came across him or have met him in person ? Ahh ! Do tell, if you did, that would have been such a wonderful experience, something to cherish forever.
Omit Needless Words - Strunk, William, Jr.
Vista? Cryptography Next Generation (CNG) here
-
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 -
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
wow ! you have included almost everything in three lines.
Chris Maunder wrote:
maintenance, debugging, extensions and getting new developers up to speed on old code that are all faster and easier.
you can say that again
Omit Needless Words - Strunk, William, Jr.
Vista? Cryptography Next Generation (CNG) here
-
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, 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.
Erm...ever heard of the dialog editor? Seriously, form or dialog design is pretty much the same regardless of whether you write in C#, VB, C++/CLI, C++/MFC or C++/WTL. I'd suggest that the Windows resource file format (.rc) is far more maintainable and less fragile than the .NET .resx format, too. Now if you want your UI to be testable (we've seen the light and now use Test Driven Development[^]), that requires forethought and design regardless of which framework you use - and that of course takes time. :rose:
Anna :rose: Linting the day away :cool: Anna's Place | Tears and Laughter "If mushy peas are the food of the devil, the stotty cake is the frisbee of God"
-
The Grand Negus wrote:
Well, does it? If so, how much faster? If not, what good is it?
I do think that .Net helps me write applications faster. As for "how much", I really have no idea. I really don't care. Why? Because speed of development isn't everything - not even the main thing. As long as I don't write applications significantly slower using .Net than using 'traditional' methods, then I don't have a problem with .Net. So, what .Net does do for me, then? "What good is it?" The benefits of .Net are that it helps me maintain my applications more efficiently, it helps me debug my applications more quickly, it helps me write better applications, it enables me to write applications I couldn't write before, and (most imporantly) significantly adds to my enjoyment of writing applications. The truth is that speed of development is marketing hype. Most marketing hype is about the things that matter to people who buy products, not about the things that matter to people who use them. A lot of products have 'features' that are there to sell them, not for people to use. For example: How many people buy mobile phones with all the latest features and just use them to make calls? How many people buy a video recorder because of all the clever things they can do (like make the tea, clean the toilet etc.), then just use them to watch pre-recorded movies? My Blog: http://allwrong.wordpress.com[^]
-
Where do they come from?:rolleyes: I gave a briefing to my new boss and some staff about what .NET is all about. His response was "I don't understand. I thought .NET would allow you to write applications faster. How can it take six months to write something? Did we make a mistake going this route?" His view of .NET prior to my presentation was that .NET was just another reusable library, plug it in and you have an application.
only two letters away from being an asset
A competent IT professional should realize that there is a vast majority of people out there who do not know or care what .NET is. They are interested in the end product. The nuts and bolts that make up the product is not of most peoples concern or should be. The platform .NET is nothing without a decent understanding of the required objectives. This needs to be effectively communicated to lay people at whichever level this may be. I would not be surprised by your bosses words. It is pure .NET marketing speak that made him think that.
-
The Grand Negus wrote:
Well, does it? If so, how much faster? If not, what good is it?
IMHO, .NET does provide faster coding for Windows based apps than in some other languages, like Java and C++. If you want a comparison, here is one place to check: http://www.qsm.com/FPGearing.html[^] Note that VB.NET (Visual Basic) takes less coding than C#. Both are .NET, but VB is a slightly more productive language. However, given a dev team of Java and C++ developers, .NET would take more time because ofthe learning curve. Given a dev team of VB6 developers who have been using VB6 for OOP (which not all have been doing so), moving to .NET has a much lower learning curve, and would save some time. It takes the opposite of a pointy-haired boss to recognize when .NET would help in the short and long runs, and when it wouldn't.
-
The Grand Negus wrote:
schoolgirls".
Care to explain that remark?
__________________ Bob is my homeboy.
-
Ahh, but see, you can read it. ;)
"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
-
The Grand Negus wrote:
Twice as good - yeah, go for it. Three times faster - no doubt! get me one of those. And... Ten times better - ah! now we're talking a whole "order of magnitude"; there's probably something very significant here; don't just get one, study it.
I'm going to redirect this a bit. In my experience, the only single change in application development that made as large a difference as you are suggesting was moving from plain jane C++ IDEs to Delphi 1 back in '94 and Delphi 2 in 95. Since then every environment/language I've used is more incremental baby steps (if it is actually better in any way at all). Of course I haven't written a non-analysis piece of code for the past 4 years and am only using C# and .NET as a gooey wrapper for Fortran (90/95/2003) code that I'm forced to write/modify/update that relies on legacy F77 libraries. Gotta love high tech advanced interplanetary exploration.
-
.NET compared to the way things are done with MFC or 32 bit Windows Programming makes development faster. .NET was a reorganization of all windows "controls" into a logical class hierarchy whose base class is of type 'object.' With 32 bit windows programming it was up to the developer to code the application's message pump and applications also had these long switch-case blocks to test for all the different windows messages they wanted their application to react to. You don't have to do any of that with .NET which means you don't have to remember all the different names for windows messages or what goes in a WParam or LParam of a windows message. .NET also provides help to developers via the CLR. In C++ 32 bit windows programming developers have to remember to deallocate the resources they allocated, in .NET object destruction is taken care of by the garbage collector, .NET provides delegates as a way of registering a method (or function in C++ jargon) with a type so that it is called when a certain object state occurs, and .NET provides properties to allow you to access a type's visible variables. I could on about the benefits that .NET provides. For the sake of brevity you can read more detail about what .NET and the CLR do to help you develop faster, and better, in a book titled "CLR Via C#" by Jeffrey Richter (MS Press). I helped Jeff write the book so I guess I know a bit about the topic. I didn't get a t-chirt for helping but at least I'm mentioned in the acknowledgement section. :O) As for Pointy haired bosses, I would ask them why they committed to the .NET technology without fully understanding what it is; sounds like an impulse decision, albeit the right one. Jamie Haddock