VS.NET future path.
-
I guess I am just gonna wait and watch if MS is willing to put its money where its mouth is. Let them rewrite at least ONE of Excel, Word, IE, MSN Messenger or Outlook to C#/.NET and I will follow suit. The same with Autocad, Visio, Rational Rose, Dreamweaver, Flash. Why will small time developers fall for C#/.NET while big businesses are not willing to bet on it ? The bottomline is, the risk reward with C++ still remains very attractive. - Vivek
Vivek Rajan wrote: Why will small time developers fall for C#/.NET while big businesses are not willing to bet on it ? Inertia? It's easier for a small team to adapt. A large team is slower to adapt.
All of my opinions are correct, even when reality makes the mistake of disagreeing with me.
ASP.NET can never fail as working with it is like fitting bras to supermodels - it's one pleasure after the next - David Wulff -
Chris Losinger wrote: .Net is worthless to me. i write desktop apps; apps that have no need for network access. :confused: You can write desktop apps with .NET, no networks involved. Actually in most cases I prefer .NET as it exposes a cleaner and easier to use API.
All of my opinions are correct, even when reality makes the mistake of disagreeing with me.
ASP.NET can never fail as working with it is like fitting bras to supermodels - it's one pleasure after the next - David WulffEddie Velasquez wrote: You can write desktop apps with .NET, no networks involved but why bother? they are slower. they require you to ship a huge runtime package. i am thousands of times more productive in MFC/C++ than i am in MS's flavor of the month (VBX, OLE, COM, ATL, WTL, DNA, .NET, etc). MFC/VC6 is not rendered useless simply because there is something else out. upgrade-fever can be cured. -c
To explain Donald Knuth's relevance to computing is like explaining Paul's relevance to the Catholic Church. He isn't God, he isn't the Son of God, but he was sent by God to explain God to the masses.
/. #3848917 -
Eddie Velasquez wrote: You can write desktop apps with .NET, no networks involved but why bother? they are slower. they require you to ship a huge runtime package. i am thousands of times more productive in MFC/C++ than i am in MS's flavor of the month (VBX, OLE, COM, ATL, WTL, DNA, .NET, etc). MFC/VC6 is not rendered useless simply because there is something else out. upgrade-fever can be cured. -c
To explain Donald Knuth's relevance to computing is like explaining Paul's relevance to the Catholic Church. He isn't God, he isn't the Son of God, but he was sent by God to explain God to the masses.
/. #3848917Chris Losinger wrote: they are slower In most cases, barely noticeable at all. Chris Losinger wrote: they require you to ship a huge runtime package Pretty soon it will be as readily available as GDI32.DLL, SHELL32.DLL and USER32.DLL. Chris Losinger wrote: i am thousands of times more productive in MFC/C++ than i am in MS's flavor of the month (VBX, OLE, COM, ATL, WTL, DNA, .NET, etc). Me too, but that is slowly changing. This market is darn competitive and I don't want to give anybody an advantage. If you do... well, that's you problem. ;) Chris Losinger wrote: MFC/VC6 is not rendered useless simply because there is something else out. That is correct. The idea reall is: is it worthwhile to upgrade right now? It all depends on the company, the developers and the products. There's no golden rule.
All of my opinions are correct, even when reality makes the mistake of disagreeing with me.
ASP.NET can never fail as working with it is like fitting bras to supermodels - it's one pleasure after the next - David Wulff -
Chris Losinger wrote: they are slower In most cases, barely noticeable at all. Chris Losinger wrote: they require you to ship a huge runtime package Pretty soon it will be as readily available as GDI32.DLL, SHELL32.DLL and USER32.DLL. Chris Losinger wrote: i am thousands of times more productive in MFC/C++ than i am in MS's flavor of the month (VBX, OLE, COM, ATL, WTL, DNA, .NET, etc). Me too, but that is slowly changing. This market is darn competitive and I don't want to give anybody an advantage. If you do... well, that's you problem. ;) Chris Losinger wrote: MFC/VC6 is not rendered useless simply because there is something else out. That is correct. The idea reall is: is it worthwhile to upgrade right now? It all depends on the company, the developers and the products. There's no golden rule.
All of my opinions are correct, even when reality makes the mistake of disagreeing with me.
ASP.NET can never fail as working with it is like fitting bras to supermodels - it's one pleasure after the next - David WulffEddie Velasquez wrote: In most cases, barely noticeable at all. not in the cases i've tested. 25x slower is pretty noticable. Eddie Velasquez wrote: Pretty soon it will be as readily available as GDI32.DLL, SHELL32.DLL and USER32.DLL. but still many tens of MB. there are still many people out there using Win95/98/ME, i wouldn't force them to download something that big just to run my app. again, .Net is worthless to me. -c
To explain Donald Knuth's relevance to computing is like explaining Paul's relevance to the Catholic Church. He isn't God, he isn't the Son of God, but he was sent by God to explain God to the masses.
/. #3848917 -
Eddie Velasquez wrote: In most cases, barely noticeable at all. not in the cases i've tested. 25x slower is pretty noticable. Eddie Velasquez wrote: Pretty soon it will be as readily available as GDI32.DLL, SHELL32.DLL and USER32.DLL. but still many tens of MB. there are still many people out there using Win95/98/ME, i wouldn't force them to download something that big just to run my app. again, .Net is worthless to me. -c
To explain Donald Knuth's relevance to computing is like explaining Paul's relevance to the Catholic Church. He isn't God, he isn't the Son of God, but he was sent by God to explain God to the masses.
/. #3848917Chris Losinger wrote: not in the cases i've tested. 25x slower is pretty noticable That is extremely noticiable. I've never seen anything like that in any of the projects I've worked with. Are you sure you're not doing something wrong? Chris Losinger wrote: but still many tens of MB. there are still many people out there using Win95/98/ME, i wouldn't force them to download something that big just to run my app. Yes, but it's only a one shot deal. If your app is small, then yes, the .NET runtime is overkill. The thing is that not only your app will use the runtime, other apps most likely will, so just create two different installs: one with the runtime and another one without it. I don't think it's that bad, but on the other hand, I don't know your app or your customers. Chris Losinger wrote: again, .Net is worthless to me. That's your call.
All of my opinions are correct, even when reality makes the mistake of disagreeing with me.
ASP.NET can never fail as working with it is like fitting bras to supermodels - it's one pleasure after the next - David Wulff -
Chris Losinger wrote: not in the cases i've tested. 25x slower is pretty noticable That is extremely noticiable. I've never seen anything like that in any of the projects I've worked with. Are you sure you're not doing something wrong? Chris Losinger wrote: but still many tens of MB. there are still many people out there using Win95/98/ME, i wouldn't force them to download something that big just to run my app. Yes, but it's only a one shot deal. If your app is small, then yes, the .NET runtime is overkill. The thing is that not only your app will use the runtime, other apps most likely will, so just create two different installs: one with the runtime and another one without it. I don't think it's that bad, but on the other hand, I don't know your app or your customers. Chris Losinger wrote: again, .Net is worthless to me. That's your call.
All of my opinions are correct, even when reality makes the mistake of disagreeing with me.
ASP.NET can never fail as working with it is like fitting bras to supermodels - it's one pleasure after the next - David WulffEddie Velasquez wrote: Are you sure you're not doing something wrong? no, i'm not sure, since it's a truly amazing difference. but i've posted the code i used here many times (see GC's first C# image filter article, which is what i'm using as a benchmark) and nobody has been able to prove me wrong. -c
To explain Donald Knuth's relevance to computing is like explaining Paul's relevance to the Catholic Church. He isn't God, he isn't the Son of God, but he was sent by God to explain God to the masses.
/. #3848917 -
Eddie Velasquez wrote: Are you sure you're not doing something wrong? no, i'm not sure, since it's a truly amazing difference. but i've posted the code i used here many times (see GC's first C# image filter article, which is what i'm using as a benchmark) and nobody has been able to prove me wrong. -c
To explain Donald Knuth's relevance to computing is like explaining Paul's relevance to the Catholic Church. He isn't God, he isn't the Son of God, but he was sent by God to explain God to the masses.
/. #3848917Chris Losinger wrote: but i've posted the code i used here many times (see GC's first C# image filter article, which is what i'm using as a benchmark) and nobody has been able to prove me wrong. Can you post a link? Not that I will be able to prove you wrong, but I will certainly try! :)
All of my opinions are correct, even when reality makes the mistake of disagreeing with me.
ASP.NET can never fail as working with it is like fitting bras to supermodels - it's one pleasure after the next - David Wulff -
Chris Losinger wrote: but i've posted the code i used here many times (see GC's first C# image filter article, which is what i'm using as a benchmark) and nobody has been able to prove me wrong. Can you post a link? Not that I will be able to prove you wrong, but I will certainly try! :)
All of my opinions are correct, even when reality makes the mistake of disagreeing with me.
ASP.NET can never fail as working with it is like fitting bras to supermodels - it's one pleasure after the next - David WulffCG's article my C++ code looks something like this (off the top of my head):
for (int i=0;i<w * h * 3;i+=3)
{
blue = p[i];
green = p[i+1];
red = p[i+2];p[i] = p[i+1] = p[i+2] = (byte)(.299 * red
- .587 * green
- .114 * blue);
}
the idea is to compare the time it takes to read then write each component of each pixel in an RGB image. -c
To explain Donald Knuth's relevance to computing is like explaining Paul's relevance to the Catholic Church. He isn't God, he isn't the Son of God, but he was sent by God to explain God to the masses.
/. #3848917 -
CG's article my C++ code looks something like this (off the top of my head):
for (int i=0;i<w * h * 3;i+=3)
{
blue = p[i];
green = p[i+1];
red = p[i+2];p[i] = p[i+1] = p[i+2] = (byte)(.299 * red
- .587 * green
- .114 * blue);
}
the idea is to compare the time it takes to read then write each component of each pixel in an RGB image. -c
To explain Donald Knuth's relevance to computing is like explaining Paul's relevance to the Catholic Church. He isn't God, he isn't the Son of God, but he was sent by God to explain God to the masses.
/. #3848917Off the top of my head:
int max = w * h * 3;
fixed(byte* ptr = p)
{
int i = 0;
while(i++ < max)
{
byte* pBlue = ptr++;
byte* pGreen = ptr++;
byte* pRed = ptr++;\*pBlue = \*Green = \*pRed = (byte)(.299 \* \*pRed + .587 \* \*pGreen + .114 \* pBlue);}
}
All of my opinions are correct, even when reality makes the mistake of disagreeing with me.
ASP.NET can never fail as working with it is like fitting bras to supermodels - it's one pleasure after the next - David Wulff -
Off the top of my head:
int max = w * h * 3;
fixed(byte* ptr = p)
{
int i = 0;
while(i++ < max)
{
byte* pBlue = ptr++;
byte* pGreen = ptr++;
byte* pRed = ptr++;\*pBlue = \*Green = \*pRed = (byte)(.299 \* \*pRed + .587 \* \*pGreen + .114 \* pBlue);}
}
All of my opinions are correct, even when reality makes the mistake of disagreeing with me.
ASP.NET can never fail as working with it is like fitting bras to supermodels - it's one pleasure after the next - David Wulfftry it in C#. put a timer around it. -c
To explain Donald Knuth's relevance to computing is like explaining Paul's relevance to the Catholic Church. He isn't God, he isn't the Son of God, but he was sent by God to explain God to the masses.
/. #3848917 -
try it in C#. put a timer around it. -c
To explain Donald Knuth's relevance to computing is like explaining Paul's relevance to the Catholic Church. He isn't God, he isn't the Son of God, but he was sent by God to explain God to the masses.
/. #3848917Chris Losinger wrote: try it in C#. put a timer around it. Don't have .NET in this machine. This is my home/gaming machine. I'll try it on monday.
All of my opinions are correct, even when reality makes the mistake of disagreeing with me.
ASP.NET can never fail as working with it is like fitting bras to supermodels - it's one pleasure after the next - David Wulff -
I really liked reading about their D language. I wonder if they will .NETify it. FreeBSD is sexy. Getting closer and closer to actually submit an article...
Interesting idea. I'm not sure how they would feel about that. Of course, after seeing Fortran.Net nothing .Net will truly surprise me again. :)
Jason Jystad
Cito Technologies
Sonork ID: Ogami(100.9918)
People seem to misinterpret complexity as sophistication.
--Niklaus Wirth (Co-Inventor of Pascal)