What does .NET mean for you?
-
Well, for me .Net means a number of things. 1/ A super sexy looking IDE ( I don't deny it ) which unfortunately is also VB user friendly, i.e. the whole thing looks like the VB ide and as a result I couldn't find a jolly thing, and when I did I hated a lot of the VBesque changes. 2/ A new language that seeks to protect me from the power of C++, on the basis that M$ claims such things are too hard. And lots of illogical syntax changes just to make it even harder for C++ programmers. 3/ A new CLR language to try to do what Java didn't, apparently because M$ can do it better, but more likely because Sun won their lawsuit and M$ needed to do something with the J++ code. 4/ From the sounds of it, a GREAT way to put together web centred stuff, and a rolling evangelism campaign that fails to consider that some of us are not inextricably tied to the web, nor does every piece of software revolve around it. 5/ A couple of new things in MFC ( all I've seen documented is an HTML Edit control and the new bitmap loading stuff ), which concern me greatly on the basis that they load GIF's, but to my knowledge using Microsoft's supplied components does not stop you from having to pay Unisys licence fees. At the least there is enough grey area surrounding this that I deliberately remove all GIF support from anything we release here. 6/ An amazing amount of hype for something that has yet to be released. I wouldn't say I'll *never* use C#, but it's certainly not suited for what we do here, and I'm glad I have the opportunity to wait until the dust settles and I can choose based on it having BEEN accepted in the marketplace, rather than bust a gut just in case it does, and learn to live without pointers ( unthinkable ) along the way. And that's just for starters. The very thought of garbage collection makes me shudder. Christian The content of this post is not necessarily the opinion of my yadda yadda yadda. To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
Ouch. Come on Christian, why hide your feelings? Tell us what you REALLY think ;) Seriously though, I have a few comments. 1) At first I didn't like the IDE either, but it's growing on me, and I do find it more productive. The ability to hide all the stuff I use and access it just by moving my mouse over it really gives me a lot of screen real-estate, and I abosolutely *LOVE* the tab groups. 2) C# is not .NET, though it does use .NET. C++ also targets .NET, and you can mix and match managed and unmanaged code in the same EXE, which means you can gain the benefits of managed code where you don't need native code, without sacrificing things like templates when you need them. This also ties into #3, in that now that MS is moving to Win64 and CE (er.. sorry "Windows Powered") is growing, you can port your code easier if it's written to .NET to begin with. .NET isn't just because MS lost their lawsuit. Hell, MS could care less about the lawsuit really. Sun never would have allowed them to do what they've done with .NET (pushing languages like C++ and VB into the VM, etc...) 5) Reading GIF files is royalty free. It's creating them that you have to pay the license for. 6) ;P My primary interest in .NET is for building GUI's. I've worked on projects where we used VB as the front end GUI, and I think .NET will work wonderfully for this, considerng that you can seamlessly connect VB, C#, managed and unmanaged C++ (not to mention the couple of dozen other .NET languages already out there), you can really gain some benefits.
-
Ouch. Come on Christian, why hide your feelings? Tell us what you REALLY think ;) Seriously though, I have a few comments. 1) At first I didn't like the IDE either, but it's growing on me, and I do find it more productive. The ability to hide all the stuff I use and access it just by moving my mouse over it really gives me a lot of screen real-estate, and I abosolutely *LOVE* the tab groups. 2) C# is not .NET, though it does use .NET. C++ also targets .NET, and you can mix and match managed and unmanaged code in the same EXE, which means you can gain the benefits of managed code where you don't need native code, without sacrificing things like templates when you need them. This also ties into #3, in that now that MS is moving to Win64 and CE (er.. sorry "Windows Powered") is growing, you can port your code easier if it's written to .NET to begin with. .NET isn't just because MS lost their lawsuit. Hell, MS could care less about the lawsuit really. Sun never would have allowed them to do what they've done with .NET (pushing languages like C++ and VB into the VM, etc...) 5) Reading GIF files is royalty free. It's creating them that you have to pay the license for. 6) ;P My primary interest in .NET is for building GUI's. I've worked on projects where we used VB as the front end GUI, and I think .NET will work wonderfully for this, considerng that you can seamlessly connect VB, C#, managed and unmanaged C++ (not to mention the couple of dozen other .NET languages already out there), you can really gain some benefits.
Everyone always tells me I should assert myself more - I guess I might try that sometime.... Taking advantage of my self imposed right of reply: 1/ I admit to not giving the IDE terribly long to prove itself, so maybe I could grow to love it. I have two monitors, so I'm not low on screen real estate. 2 & 3/ Given that I work with 3D and 2D graphics, it's the idea of a CLR overall that scares me. I don't want another layer sitting between my code and the processor, slowing things down. The report I read said M$ AIM to have managed code run as fast as VB. This will be the zenith of their expectations, and it's not enough. 5/ Opinions vary as to what is and isn't covered by the Unisys patent, my motto is better safe than sorry. ( Also better not to encourage the format ) 6/ I would agree for this sort of thing it will make it a bit easier to use VB for RAD and C++/C# for back end, which I believe a lot of people do now with COM. I hope COM does not die before I find the time to learn it, but that is another story. I cringe when people extoll the benefits of .Net in allowing a team to work together in different languages, but I'd agree for situations that are already mixed language, it will probably be a good thing. This goes back to my original point - .Net is not an all embracing solution, it is good for the subset of development it is targeting, I have no doubt. M$ are not stupid, but they CAN find themselves focused on their vision of the universe and what it should be. Christian The content of this post is not necessarily the opinion of my yadda yadda yadda. To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
-
There seems to be the perception that MS is pushing .NET down our throats and that we better get with the program or, or...well, "or else". You mean this isn't the case? ;) But seriously, I personally don't see myself diving head-first into .NET for two big reasons:
- I have little interest in writing Internet- or web-based apps.
- I have even less interest in learning yet another class library.
#1 is just my preference, but #2 might be a stumbling block for many people. I started with the SDK, then learned tons about MFC. It took me a long time to do anything serious with ATL because it worked totally differently from MFC, and I felt I would be better served continuing on with what I knew rather than go through the haze and learning curve of ATL. As for the IDE... well, I bet many of you know that I'm a "grumpy old man" when it comes to UI. I ain't changing now. :) My feelings would best be described as: :eek: The VC 6 IDE + WndTabs is perfect IMNSHO. VS.NET looks and feels clunky with those weird docking/hiding windows. And the menus and toolbars... ugh, could MS have made them any uglier? They look totally washed out and it's hard to find the buttons I need. (Do Whistler and Office XP look the same?) The big selling point of .NET is ease of writing new apps. While that's an admirable goal, I agree with another comment posted earlier that it may be hiding too much and keeping the programmer too much in the dark. I've been trying to make an argument to back up this opinion for about 10 minutes now, but I can never make it sound good. So I'll just leave it at that as MHO. --Mike-- http://home.inreach.com/mdunn/ The preferred snack of 4 out of 5 Lounge readers.
The VC 6 IDE + WndTabs is perfect IMNSHO. I almost totally agree with you - although the latest version seems a bit screwy to me ( although the tech support guys tell me otherwise :) ), I still couldn't live without my Visual Assist... Christian The content of this post is not necessarily the opinion of my yadda yadda yadda. To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
-
There seems to be the perception that MS is pushing .NET down our throats and that we better get with the program or, or...well, "or else". You mean this isn't the case? ;) But seriously, I personally don't see myself diving head-first into .NET for two big reasons:
- I have little interest in writing Internet- or web-based apps.
- I have even less interest in learning yet another class library.
#1 is just my preference, but #2 might be a stumbling block for many people. I started with the SDK, then learned tons about MFC. It took me a long time to do anything serious with ATL because it worked totally differently from MFC, and I felt I would be better served continuing on with what I knew rather than go through the haze and learning curve of ATL. As for the IDE... well, I bet many of you know that I'm a "grumpy old man" when it comes to UI. I ain't changing now. :) My feelings would best be described as: :eek: The VC 6 IDE + WndTabs is perfect IMNSHO. VS.NET looks and feels clunky with those weird docking/hiding windows. And the menus and toolbars... ugh, could MS have made them any uglier? They look totally washed out and it's hard to find the buttons I need. (Do Whistler and Office XP look the same?) The big selling point of .NET is ease of writing new apps. While that's an admirable goal, I agree with another comment posted earlier that it may be hiding too much and keeping the programmer too much in the dark. I've been trying to make an argument to back up this opinion for about 10 minutes now, but I can never make it sound good. So I'll just leave it at that as MHO. --Mike-- http://home.inreach.com/mdunn/ The preferred snack of 4 out of 5 Lounge readers.
The new namespaces are certainly a head full but I don't think there is anywhere near the pain associated with getting a handle on ATL, COM or even MFC. The dynamic help and intellisense takes a lot of this pain away. I totally agree with you on the 'washed out' look of the new UI. I always thought that making your users guess which bits of the screen were mouse activateable (a new word!) was a Bad Thing. With the increasing move to the flat pastel look it's sometimes hard to find that elusive toolbar button or pulldown. I'm sure we'll look back in horror at pre-XP UI's and wonder what on Earth we were thinking about. Then again, all they really have to do is use a bold and chunky font in the dialogs and hey presto - Windows 3.1! The preferred snack of 4 out of 5 Lounge readers. I only just worked out what your sig means :) cheers, Chris Maunder
-
Ouch. Come on Christian, why hide your feelings? Tell us what you REALLY think ;) Seriously though, I have a few comments. 1) At first I didn't like the IDE either, but it's growing on me, and I do find it more productive. The ability to hide all the stuff I use and access it just by moving my mouse over it really gives me a lot of screen real-estate, and I abosolutely *LOVE* the tab groups. 2) C# is not .NET, though it does use .NET. C++ also targets .NET, and you can mix and match managed and unmanaged code in the same EXE, which means you can gain the benefits of managed code where you don't need native code, without sacrificing things like templates when you need them. This also ties into #3, in that now that MS is moving to Win64 and CE (er.. sorry "Windows Powered") is growing, you can port your code easier if it's written to .NET to begin with. .NET isn't just because MS lost their lawsuit. Hell, MS could care less about the lawsuit really. Sun never would have allowed them to do what they've done with .NET (pushing languages like C++ and VB into the VM, etc...) 5) Reading GIF files is royalty free. It's creating them that you have to pay the license for. 6) ;P My primary interest in .NET is for building GUI's. I've worked on projects where we used VB as the front end GUI, and I think .NET will work wonderfully for this, considerng that you can seamlessly connect VB, C#, managed and unmanaged C++ (not to mention the couple of dozen other .NET languages already out there), you can really gain some benefits.
considerng that you can seamlessly connect VB, C#, managed and unmanaged C++ (not to mention the couple of dozen other .NET languages already out there), you can really gain some benefits Yup! I've worked on a ton of projects where we had to mix FORTRAN, C and C++ and I still have nightmares about trying to get it all to work, and get some decent debugging happening. Plus we had a suite of stuff written in FORTRAN that was simply too painful to call from C++. It would be cool to rewrite some of that stuff and simply inherit some C++ classes from FORTRAN. Mmmmm... cheers, Chris Maunder
-
I dunno that I'd have said my experience was *vast*, but thank you :) This is part of my fear though - an easier IDE will not lead to people understanding things like design, I fear a world were a lot of software is written by monkeys for bananas. I got a look because my work subscribes to MSDN, sorry. :( Christian The content of this post is not necessarily the opinion of my yadda yadda yadda. To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
'...fear a world were a lot of software is written by monkeys for bananas...'. you get scared by monkeys ? for bananas ? Sorry mate, but you're so funny. Which type of software do you code ? Ducks ? Mice ? Do you think you 'understand things like design' better than a monkey ? Sure ? Simpler IDE and simpler stuff are designed to let you concentrate on the things you have to develop. Otherwise if you prefer the hard way you can still code assembly ;P
-
Everyone always tells me I should assert myself more - I guess I might try that sometime.... Taking advantage of my self imposed right of reply: 1/ I admit to not giving the IDE terribly long to prove itself, so maybe I could grow to love it. I have two monitors, so I'm not low on screen real estate. 2 & 3/ Given that I work with 3D and 2D graphics, it's the idea of a CLR overall that scares me. I don't want another layer sitting between my code and the processor, slowing things down. The report I read said M$ AIM to have managed code run as fast as VB. This will be the zenith of their expectations, and it's not enough. 5/ Opinions vary as to what is and isn't covered by the Unisys patent, my motto is better safe than sorry. ( Also better not to encourage the format ) 6/ I would agree for this sort of thing it will make it a bit easier to use VB for RAD and C++/C# for back end, which I believe a lot of people do now with COM. I hope COM does not die before I find the time to learn it, but that is another story. I cringe when people extoll the benefits of .Net in allowing a team to work together in different languages, but I'd agree for situations that are already mixed language, it will probably be a good thing. This goes back to my original point - .Net is not an all embracing solution, it is good for the subset of development it is targeting, I have no doubt. M$ are not stupid, but they CAN find themselves focused on their vision of the universe and what it should be. Christian The content of this post is not necessarily the opinion of my yadda yadda yadda. To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
'...The report I read said M$ AIM to have managed code run as fast as VB...'. Which report ? Managed code produces IL (Intermediate Language), then when a function is called a stub is called checking is the function has already been compiled. If not a JIT compiler compiles the code for the target platform the function is running on (Win32, Win64, WinCe, Linux...). Next time the function is called is called directly in native code so you have a penalty just the first time but this gives you a change to 'write once, run anywere' as Java does. So this tec. is not new and it's not the major strategy in the .NET. Web Services are the core, WSDL, UDDI and SOAP, that's why is called .NET. I 've moved myself to Java because for certain aspects is a mature technology and it's a reality now, but I'm sure in the future (not before the second half of 2002) I will manage .NET
-
Hey all, There seems to be the perception that MS is pushing .NET down our throats and that we better get with the program or, or...well, "or else". So what exactly is it about the new IDE, the new and updated versions of MFC and ATL, C#, ADO.NET etc that interests/annoys/excites or bores you? To me, it's a better platform for Code Project. No more VBScript, no more hassles with COM components, a faster site and a more manageable codebase. It's also a better IDE (a HUGE improvement IMHO); a new language that fills the void after the Sun vs MS hassles; improved ATL and MFC and a compiler that picks up more errors and tells you about them in a way that now makes sense. There is also another distributable run-time. It's certainly not going to fit on a 1.44 floppy, and what happens when v1.01, v1.2, v2.0...come out? There is the concern that there may not be a huge take-up of client side .NET, the confusion with implementing the security model in your apps. So I want to know what your thoughts on .NET (the whole thing, not just C#) are. For those who don't like it, can you tell us what it is you don't like, and for those with good experiences, please share them! cheers, Chris Maunder
Apart from hype, apart from tons of goodies, .NET seems to be paving the way for a commercial implementation of IP (Intentional Programming). Don't mistake me, I believe that .NET is great and does make sense economically, but the long-awaited breakthrough in software development will come from something like IP.
-
'...fear a world were a lot of software is written by monkeys for bananas...'. you get scared by monkeys ? for bananas ? Sorry mate, but you're so funny. Which type of software do you code ? Ducks ? Mice ? Do you think you 'understand things like design' better than a monkey ? Sure ? Simpler IDE and simpler stuff are designed to let you concentrate on the things you have to develop. Otherwise if you prefer the hard way you can still code assembly ;P
Clearly English is not your first language, or you would have understood me, and understood that asking me if I understand design better than a monkey is more than a little insulting... My point is that a simpler IDE ( you obviously have not SEEN .Net ) and 'simpler stuff to design' ( i.e. remove powerful stuff like pointers, on the basis that they are 'too hard' ( that's basically what M$ are saying )) both cripple a serious developer by removing tools of his trade, AND lower the barrier of entry WITHOUT enforcing things like good design. It becomes easier and easier for people to be bad programmers and come out with something that works, sort of. I don't doubt that good progammers will write good code in C#, I think though that it will be a continuation of what VB has given us - a million websites showing off a million poorly written programs. Christian The content of this post is not necessarily the opinion of my yadda yadda yadda. To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
-
'...The report I read said M$ AIM to have managed code run as fast as VB...'. Which report ? Managed code produces IL (Intermediate Language), then when a function is called a stub is called checking is the function has already been compiled. If not a JIT compiler compiles the code for the target platform the function is running on (Win32, Win64, WinCe, Linux...). Next time the function is called is called directly in native code so you have a penalty just the first time but this gives you a change to 'write once, run anywere' as Java does. So this tec. is not new and it's not the major strategy in the .NET. Web Services are the core, WSDL, UDDI and SOAP, that's why is called .NET. I 've moved myself to Java because for certain aspects is a mature technology and it's a reality now, but I'm sure in the future (not before the second half of 2002) I will manage .NET
It was an article from M$ themselves, in Visual C++ Developers Journal from memory, a mag that is fawning over C# in particular if ever I saw one. I covered the fact that web services are the core in my original post, another reason the whole thing is right now of no use to me. If you're using Java, I have no doubt you will end up using .Net and good luck to you. I am talking about it's usefulness in my market, and I reiterate that no CLR is going to be transparent and therefore when I am looking at rewriting GDI functions in assembler to gain speed, I'm not going to add another layer to my code to lose it needlessly. Christian The content of this post is not necessarily the opinion of my yadda yadda yadda. To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
-
Clearly English is not your first language, or you would have understood me, and understood that asking me if I understand design better than a monkey is more than a little insulting... My point is that a simpler IDE ( you obviously have not SEEN .Net ) and 'simpler stuff to design' ( i.e. remove powerful stuff like pointers, on the basis that they are 'too hard' ( that's basically what M$ are saying )) both cripple a serious developer by removing tools of his trade, AND lower the barrier of entry WITHOUT enforcing things like good design. It becomes easier and easier for people to be bad programmers and come out with something that works, sort of. I don't doubt that good progammers will write good code in C#, I think though that it will be a continuation of what VB has given us - a million websites showing off a million poorly written programs. Christian The content of this post is not necessarily the opinion of my yadda yadda yadda. To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
'...Clearly English is not your first language, or you would have understood me, and understood that asking me if I understand design better than a monkey is more than a little insulting......' I've clearly touched some hurting point of you... ooopppsss '...you obviously have not SEEN .Net ) and 'simpler stuff to design' ( i.e. remove powerful stuff like pointers, on the basis that they are 'too hard'...' YES, I did clearly touched it, oooppsss C++ is still there in the .NET and you can continue to use it if you like it. Do you understand my poor English now ? '...It becomes easier and easier for people to be bad programmers and come out with something that works, sort of. I don't doubt that good progammers will write good code in C#, I think though that it will be a continuation of what VB has given us - a million websites showing off a million poorly written programs...' Well, I don't personally use VB but one thing is sure : it's the most popular language on the earth and if you don't like 'a million websites showing off a million poorly written programs' you can simply stay away from them so you won't be scared anymore ;P
-
It was an article from M$ themselves, in Visual C++ Developers Journal from memory, a mag that is fawning over C# in particular if ever I saw one. I covered the fact that web services are the core in my original post, another reason the whole thing is right now of no use to me. If you're using Java, I have no doubt you will end up using .Net and good luck to you. I am talking about it's usefulness in my market, and I reiterate that no CLR is going to be transparent and therefore when I am looking at rewriting GDI functions in assembler to gain speed, I'm not going to add another layer to my code to lose it needlessly. Christian The content of this post is not necessarily the opinion of my yadda yadda yadda. To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
-
'...Clearly English is not your first language, or you would have understood me, and understood that asking me if I understand design better than a monkey is more than a little insulting......' I've clearly touched some hurting point of you... ooopppsss '...you obviously have not SEEN .Net ) and 'simpler stuff to design' ( i.e. remove powerful stuff like pointers, on the basis that they are 'too hard'...' YES, I did clearly touched it, oooppsss C++ is still there in the .NET and you can continue to use it if you like it. Do you understand my poor English now ? '...It becomes easier and easier for people to be bad programmers and come out with something that works, sort of. I don't doubt that good progammers will write good code in C#, I think though that it will be a continuation of what VB has given us - a million websites showing off a million poorly written programs...' Well, I don't personally use VB but one thing is sure : it's the most popular language on the earth and if you don't like 'a million websites showing off a million poorly written programs' you can simply stay away from them so you won't be scared anymore ;P
'...Clearly English is not your first language, or you would have understood me, and understood that asking me if I understand design better than a monkey is more than a little insulting......' I've clearly touched some hurting point of you... ooopppsss Sorry, you expected to be offensive and get no reaction ? '...you obviously have not SEEN .Net ) and 'simpler stuff to design' ( i.e. remove powerful stuff like pointers, on the basis that they are 'too hard'...' YES, I did clearly touched it, oooppsss I don't know what you mean. a/ .Net is NOT a simpler IDE, it MAY prove to be more productive but it is very cluttered and ugly to someone used to VC rather than VB. b/ Microsoft s OFFICIAL blurb is that C# is as easy as VB and as powerful as C++ with stuff like pointers romoved and stuff like garbage collection put in to make it easier. C++ is still there in the .NET and you can continue to use it if you like it. Do you understand my poor English now ? Yeah, yeah - I can use it, I can even mix it was Cb, but it still comes down to the CLR, the extra layer between me and the processor. '...It becomes easier and easier for people to be bad programmers and come out with something that works, sort of. I don't doubt that good progammers will write good code in C#, I think though that it will be a continuation of what VB has given us - a million websites showing off a million poorly written programs...' Well, I don't personally use VB but one thing is sure : it's the most popular language on the earth and if you don't like 'a million websites showing off a million poorly written programs' you can simply stay away from them so you won't be scared anymore ;P I guess you still don't understand me, or you are being obtuse. I'm concerned that M$ is endorsing people getting easy to use tools that do not emphasise skill, I am not scared that this is already the case, I just don't go there, as you say. This is the real test of VB - not how many programs ARE there, but how many do you USE ? Same will be true of .Net. Christian The content of this post is not necessarily the opinion of my yadda yadda yadda. To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
-
'...Clearly English is not your first language, or you would have understood me, and understood that asking me if I understand design better than a monkey is more than a little insulting......' I've clearly touched some hurting point of you... ooopppsss Sorry, you expected to be offensive and get no reaction ? '...you obviously have not SEEN .Net ) and 'simpler stuff to design' ( i.e. remove powerful stuff like pointers, on the basis that they are 'too hard'...' YES, I did clearly touched it, oooppsss I don't know what you mean. a/ .Net is NOT a simpler IDE, it MAY prove to be more productive but it is very cluttered and ugly to someone used to VC rather than VB. b/ Microsoft s OFFICIAL blurb is that C# is as easy as VB and as powerful as C++ with stuff like pointers romoved and stuff like garbage collection put in to make it easier. C++ is still there in the .NET and you can continue to use it if you like it. Do you understand my poor English now ? Yeah, yeah - I can use it, I can even mix it was Cb, but it still comes down to the CLR, the extra layer between me and the processor. '...It becomes easier and easier for people to be bad programmers and come out with something that works, sort of. I don't doubt that good progammers will write good code in C#, I think though that it will be a continuation of what VB has given us - a million websites showing off a million poorly written programs...' Well, I don't personally use VB but one thing is sure : it's the most popular language on the earth and if you don't like 'a million websites showing off a million poorly written programs' you can simply stay away from them so you won't be scared anymore ;P I guess you still don't understand me, or you are being obtuse. I'm concerned that M$ is endorsing people getting easy to use tools that do not emphasise skill, I am not scared that this is already the case, I just don't go there, as you say. This is the real test of VB - not how many programs ARE there, but how many do you USE ? Same will be true of .Net. Christian The content of this post is not necessarily the opinion of my yadda yadda yadda. To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
'...Sorry, you expected to be offensive and get no reaction ? ...' opppsss, I did it again.... '...Yeah, yeah - I can use it, I can even mix it was Cb, but it still comes down to the CLR, the extra layer between me and the processor. ' Probably you're speaking of something you don't understand very well : CLR will be in the meddle of you and your processor only if you use managed code. Otherwise you can still program in C++ and MFC7. Christian, do you write'...well design code' ? Who's the monkey for bananas that check if you write well design code ? I've read from your signature that you probably don't understand recursion... ;P ;P ;P ;P ;P ;P ;P smile please
-
'...Clearly English is not your first language, or you would have understood me, and understood that asking me if I understand design better than a monkey is more than a little insulting......' I've clearly touched some hurting point of you... ooopppsss Sorry, you expected to be offensive and get no reaction ? '...you obviously have not SEEN .Net ) and 'simpler stuff to design' ( i.e. remove powerful stuff like pointers, on the basis that they are 'too hard'...' YES, I did clearly touched it, oooppsss I don't know what you mean. a/ .Net is NOT a simpler IDE, it MAY prove to be more productive but it is very cluttered and ugly to someone used to VC rather than VB. b/ Microsoft s OFFICIAL blurb is that C# is as easy as VB and as powerful as C++ with stuff like pointers romoved and stuff like garbage collection put in to make it easier. C++ is still there in the .NET and you can continue to use it if you like it. Do you understand my poor English now ? Yeah, yeah - I can use it, I can even mix it was Cb, but it still comes down to the CLR, the extra layer between me and the processor. '...It becomes easier and easier for people to be bad programmers and come out with something that works, sort of. I don't doubt that good progammers will write good code in C#, I think though that it will be a continuation of what VB has given us - a million websites showing off a million poorly written programs...' Well, I don't personally use VB but one thing is sure : it's the most popular language on the earth and if you don't like 'a million websites showing off a million poorly written programs' you can simply stay away from them so you won't be scared anymore ;P I guess you still don't understand me, or you are being obtuse. I'm concerned that M$ is endorsing people getting easy to use tools that do not emphasise skill, I am not scared that this is already the case, I just don't go there, as you say. This is the real test of VB - not how many programs ARE there, but how many do you USE ? Same will be true of .Net. Christian The content of this post is not necessarily the opinion of my yadda yadda yadda. To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
>>a/ .Net is NOT a simpler IDE, it MAY prove to be more productive but it is very> cluttered and ugly to someone used to VC rather than VB.<< I don't understand why all you VC guys think the IDE is like the VB IDE. It's not. I've been programming in VB for quite a while now and the IDE has changed quite a bit. I also use Visual InterDev extensively and I have to say that the IDE is InterDev with nicer looking menus. And the InterDev IDE looks quite similar to the VC IDE which I also use quite often. Personally, I hate the VB IDE and love the InterDev and VC IDE's and I welcome the change in VS.NET. >>Yeah, yeah - I can use it, I can even mix it was Cb, but it still comes down to the CLR, the extra layer between me and the processor<< I don't understand the "mix it was Cb" statement. Do you mean "mix it with C#?" Anyway, C++ can still be compiled to native code without requiring the CLR, just like it's always been. It's the only language in the .NET world that can. However, if you do mix it with C#, VB.NET, COBOL.NET ;P , or any other .NET language, then you will be using C++ with Managed Extensions (MC++) and the CLR will come into play. Jason Gerard MCSD, MCSE Solutions Developer Technology Point International, Inc.
-
Apart from hype, apart from tons of goodies, .NET seems to be paving the way for a commercial implementation of IP (Intentional Programming). Don't mistake me, I believe that .NET is great and does make sense economically, but the long-awaited breakthrough in software development will come from something like IP.
-
Hey all, There seems to be the perception that MS is pushing .NET down our throats and that we better get with the program or, or...well, "or else". So what exactly is it about the new IDE, the new and updated versions of MFC and ATL, C#, ADO.NET etc that interests/annoys/excites or bores you? To me, it's a better platform for Code Project. No more VBScript, no more hassles with COM components, a faster site and a more manageable codebase. It's also a better IDE (a HUGE improvement IMHO); a new language that fills the void after the Sun vs MS hassles; improved ATL and MFC and a compiler that picks up more errors and tells you about them in a way that now makes sense. There is also another distributable run-time. It's certainly not going to fit on a 1.44 floppy, and what happens when v1.01, v1.2, v2.0...come out? There is the concern that there may not be a huge take-up of client side .NET, the confusion with implementing the security model in your apps. So I want to know what your thoughts on .NET (the whole thing, not just C#) are. For those who don't like it, can you tell us what it is you don't like, and for those with good experiences, please share them! cheers, Chris Maunder
The reason I'm not interested in .NET is that it is simply a continuation of Microsoft's previous technology development scheme: 1) Envision a new technology that will solve all the problems of the old 2) Work a small team of engineers to death proving the concept 3) Announce this new technology that will change the world 4) Work a large team of engineers to death meeting the deadlines 5) Release the technology before it is ready 6) Stand back and let the world deal with the confusing, incomplete, and buggy results of this process 7) Repeat as necessary. Your comments are pretty telling in this regard: "No more VBScript". Wasn't VBScript supposed to bring programming to the masses? Instead, all it did was unleash viruses on the world. "no more hassles with COM components" COM componments were supposed to allow us to build applications by "simply" connecting components. Uh-huh. "what happens when v1.01, v1.2, v2.0...come out?" Indeed. Versionitis is the NUMBER 1 problem with Windows - it's the cause of much of the instability and "system rot" that plagues Windows and, more importantly, we the users. MS has never solved the problems caused by their reliance on interchangable system components - they've just caused the problems to resurface wearing different guises. You observation "what happens when v1.01, v1.2, v2.0...come out?" is telling. Versionitis is the number 1 problem in the Windows world
-
Hey all, There seems to be the perception that MS is pushing .NET down our throats and that we better get with the program or, or...well, "or else". So what exactly is it about the new IDE, the new and updated versions of MFC and ATL, C#, ADO.NET etc that interests/annoys/excites or bores you? To me, it's a better platform for Code Project. No more VBScript, no more hassles with COM components, a faster site and a more manageable codebase. It's also a better IDE (a HUGE improvement IMHO); a new language that fills the void after the Sun vs MS hassles; improved ATL and MFC and a compiler that picks up more errors and tells you about them in a way that now makes sense. There is also another distributable run-time. It's certainly not going to fit on a 1.44 floppy, and what happens when v1.01, v1.2, v2.0...come out? There is the concern that there may not be a huge take-up of client side .NET, the confusion with implementing the security model in your apps. So I want to know what your thoughts on .NET (the whole thing, not just C#) are. For those who don't like it, can you tell us what it is you don't like, and for those with good experiences, please share them! cheers, Chris Maunder
.NET looks good and I'd love to check it out, but my principal current software development project involves moving a Windows application that we have been using internally into a commercial product. Our market research shows that the potential customers for this product (agricultural and pharmaceutical industries) are 99%+ Linux (The Human Genome issue of Science magazine offers the career advice that Linux expertise is a non-negotiable requirement for the bioinformatics industry), so I can't afford to look at .NET until I can evaluate the Linux version.
-
'...Sorry, you expected to be offensive and get no reaction ? ...' opppsss, I did it again.... '...Yeah, yeah - I can use it, I can even mix it was Cb, but it still comes down to the CLR, the extra layer between me and the processor. ' Probably you're speaking of something you don't understand very well : CLR will be in the meddle of you and your processor only if you use managed code. Otherwise you can still program in C++ and MFC7. Christian, do you write'...well design code' ? Who's the monkey for bananas that check if you write well design code ? I've read from your signature that you probably don't understand recursion... ;P ;P ;P ;P ;P ;P ;P smile please
-
There seems to be the perception that MS is pushing .NET down our throats and that we better get with the program or, or...well, "or else". You mean this isn't the case? ;) But seriously, I personally don't see myself diving head-first into .NET for two big reasons:
- I have little interest in writing Internet- or web-based apps.
- I have even less interest in learning yet another class library.
#1 is just my preference, but #2 might be a stumbling block for many people. I started with the SDK, then learned tons about MFC. It took me a long time to do anything serious with ATL because it worked totally differently from MFC, and I felt I would be better served continuing on with what I knew rather than go through the haze and learning curve of ATL. As for the IDE... well, I bet many of you know that I'm a "grumpy old man" when it comes to UI. I ain't changing now. :) My feelings would best be described as: :eek: The VC 6 IDE + WndTabs is perfect IMNSHO. VS.NET looks and feels clunky with those weird docking/hiding windows. And the menus and toolbars... ugh, could MS have made them any uglier? They look totally washed out and it's hard to find the buttons I need. (Do Whistler and Office XP look the same?) The big selling point of .NET is ease of writing new apps. While that's an admirable goal, I agree with another comment posted earlier that it may be hiding too much and keeping the programmer too much in the dark. I've been trying to make an argument to back up this opinion for about 10 minutes now, but I can never make it sound good. So I'll just leave it at that as MHO. --Mike-- http://home.inreach.com/mdunn/ The preferred snack of 4 out of 5 Lounge readers.
About the last thing you were going to comment on, but didn't. I agree with another comment posted earlier that it may be hiding too much and keeping the programmer too much in the dark. Would it be something along the lines of. "RAD" tools and philosophies, and other techniques to take the "pain" out of programming only serve to dumb-down the programmer. This is not a good thing. Supplying a wizard so a tyro can knock up a GUI-based wordprocessor app in 5 minutes leads to a false sense of achievement and security. (Now spend the next 6 months battling the class-library infrastructure to get the thing working how you want it). (Caution, mini-rant approaching) ....but it's not all Microsoft's or even the .NET-type programmers' fault, I've seen managers drool when presented with flashy GUI's. I've seen people promoted on the strength of a cardboard GUI with nothing behind it. (Rant ends). In my opinion (not humble, or otherwise), .NET == programming with nappies. And on a professional note, the company I contract for are moving away from Microsoft, so we're looking initially at Linux cross-platform code. Which means no .NET. Anyone know if Microsoft are now "deprecating" (love that word!) "old" COM? I'm interested purely because if we use COM under Linux, then we're flogging a compatibility dead-horse. Ho hum, back to using sockets for IPC.....