Microsoft technologies Simplicity && illiteracy VS complication && professionalism [modified]
-
As an ex C++ with MFC programmer migrating to C# .NET, I think you are wrong. C# allows you to do anything C++ does, but with added bonus: it is a lot harder to get get it wrong. Memory leaks - unless you take over pointers then they aren't your fault any more!
No trees were harmed in the sending of this message; however, a significant number of electrons were slightly inconvenienced. This message is made of fully recyclable Zeros and Ones
maybe you are right but I am not talking about MFC I am talking about C++ standard itself with the strength of GUI designing of WXWIDGETS and i appreciate your answer
-
I used to working on a big project, with lots of code and with a lot of customizable GUI, the name of the platform i was using was "wxwidgets" and it was a platform that is based on C++ ,I was learning lots of things especially in visual programming and i could do whatever i wanted because of strength of c++ and the platform itself and it had got a handy dandy (and simple) help , it was just a chm file that i could find all i wanted simply there but i migrated to C#, (and i used to be familiar with the technology of .NET especially C#) but now i feel that C# say nothing about anything , it stay you away of the real knowledge of visual programming (especially and other base concept in general term) and i feel if you want to learn c# especially by the means of books and videos you will just learn a shell of all is happening under the hood and you still can not find exactly what you want or maybe somethings doesn't exist to be found I want to know if you all programmers agree with me or you are not thank you all especially some of you that tell me about your idea about the issue thank you'all and i am talking about the technology of Microsoft Co. why all are talking about my style of writing or literature ?
modified on Wednesday, May 6, 2009 7:04 AM
If you have strong native language programming skills, there's absolutely nothing wrong in migrating to managed code. I say it because you know what actually is being abstracted, and you know what is happening internally. If you are still learning native language programming, you can still only master the basics and learn managed code simultaneously. It is going to help you some or the other day. But, if you want to be writing native code all the time and are passionate about it, find a job where you get to do such a thing. I did it. :)
It is a crappy thing, but it's life -^ Carlo Pallini
-
OriginalGriff wrote:
C# allows you to do anything C++ does, but with added bonus bloat:
Fixed that for ya. :laugh: Seriously though, you cannot quote it that simply. May be you should write an anti-virus in C#? Think of high performance applications, realtime processing applications, graphics rendering, etc., Can you write such things in C#? So, the question is not Can you, but Will you do it? .NET and Native language programming are existing to solve different purposes, so use it wisely. Trying to do everything in the world with C# is not the brightest idea if you ask me. So, C# cannot do everything C++ does, but the converse part may be true. If you have the time, have a look at my reply to the question, is MFC Obsolete?[^] Good day. :) [edit] For the records, I'm not voting you down :) [/edit]
It is a crappy thing, but it's life -^ Carlo Pallini
An oversimplification, I admit. No I wouldn't write anything quick in C# - I use assembler for interrupt routines, or vanilla C. Though I have used C++ for embedded applications, with a little assembler at startup and for interrupts, I would not consider C# because of the memory requirements. But equally, I wouldn't want to write .NET applications in assembler (or C again)!
No trees were harmed in the sending of this message; however, a significant number of electrons were slightly inconvenienced. This message is made of fully recyclable Zeros and Ones
-
OriginalGriff wrote:
C# allows you to do anything C++ does, but with added bonus bloat:
Fixed that for ya. :laugh: Seriously though, you cannot quote it that simply. May be you should write an anti-virus in C#? Think of high performance applications, realtime processing applications, graphics rendering, etc., Can you write such things in C#? So, the question is not Can you, but Will you do it? .NET and Native language programming are existing to solve different purposes, so use it wisely. Trying to do everything in the world with C# is not the brightest idea if you ask me. So, C# cannot do everything C++ does, but the converse part may be true. If you have the time, have a look at my reply to the question, is MFC Obsolete?[^] Good day. :) [edit] For the records, I'm not voting you down :) [/edit]
It is a crappy thing, but it's life -^ Carlo Pallini
The other (and possibly more important) question to ask is: Which is more important to the client, speed of application development (Developer productivity) versus speed of execution? Developers are expensive resources. C# provides developers with a lot of useful tools to do the same things faster (yes, it isn't the ideal for every task, but it does make many that much easier).
-
If you have strong native language programming skills, there's absolutely nothing wrong in migrating to managed code. I say it because you know what actually is being abstracted, and you know what is happening internally. If you are still learning native language programming, you can still only master the basics and learn managed code simultaneously. It is going to help you some or the other day. But, if you want to be writing native code all the time and are passionate about it, find a job where you get to do such a thing. I did it. :)
It is a crappy thing, but it's life -^ Carlo Pallini
I have that kind of job but you know I have migrated to C# and I told my Manager some reason for migration and now I can not change what I did, you know thank you, that you remind me that good days that I was coding in CPP, my love, and feeling good
-
OriginalGriff wrote:
C# allows you to do anything C++ does, but with added bonus bloat:
Fixed that for ya. :laugh: Seriously though, you cannot quote it that simply. May be you should write an anti-virus in C#? Think of high performance applications, realtime processing applications, graphics rendering, etc., Can you write such things in C#? So, the question is not Can you, but Will you do it? .NET and Native language programming are existing to solve different purposes, so use it wisely. Trying to do everything in the world with C# is not the brightest idea if you ask me. So, C# cannot do everything C++ does, but the converse part may be true. If you have the time, have a look at my reply to the question, is MFC Obsolete?[^] Good day. :) [edit] For the records, I'm not voting you down :) [/edit]
It is a crappy thing, but it's life -^ Carlo Pallini
-
The other (and possibly more important) question to ask is: Which is more important to the client, speed of application development (Developer productivity) versus speed of execution? Developers are expensive resources. C# provides developers with a lot of useful tools to do the same things faster (yes, it isn't the ideal for every task, but it does make many that much easier).
ZaoWuYa wrote:
Which is more important to the client, speed of application development (Developer productivity) versus speed of execution?
I wouldn't want a client who tells me what to write a program in - I must be suggesting which tools/languages to use. All I want from the client is the problem set, that is expected to be solved. For me, performance is always important (bearing in mind that a bad programmer can write an inefficient program in C++ too). I've said enough on this topic on the link provided in my other reply, so I don't want to discuss this now.
It is a crappy thing, but it's life -^ Carlo Pallini
-
If you have strong native language programming skills, there's absolutely nothing wrong in migrating to managed code. I say it because you know what actually is being abstracted, and you know what is happening internally. If you are still learning native language programming, you can still only master the basics and learn managed code simultaneously. It is going to help you some or the other day. But, if you want to be writing native code all the time and are passionate about it, find a job where you get to do such a thing. I did it. :)
It is a crappy thing, but it's life -^ Carlo Pallini
I have that kind of job but you know I have migrated to C# and I told my Manager some reason for migration and now I can not change what I did, you know thank you, that you remind me that good days that I was coding in CPP untill 9m, my love, and feeling good
-
Rajesh R Subramanian wrote:
have a look at my reply to the question
Awesome post, exactly the reason why I wanted bookmarking extended to threads, and not only article.
A pleasure that you like my post. :)
It is a crappy thing, but it's life -^ Carlo Pallini
-
ZaoWuYa wrote:
Which is more important to the client, speed of application development (Developer productivity) versus speed of execution?
I wouldn't want a client who tells me what to write a program in - I must be suggesting which tools/languages to use. All I want from the client is the problem set, that is expected to be solved. For me, performance is always important (bearing in mind that a bad programmer can write an inefficient program in C++ too). I've said enough on this topic on the link provided in my other reply, so I don't want to discuss this now.
It is a crappy thing, but it's life -^ Carlo Pallini
Sorry, I might not have been 100% clear here, but what I mean to say is that we should be using the most appropriate tool to get the job done (to acceptable quality) in the shortest amount of time. If the job is an embedded application, by all means stick to C / C++. If it is a desktop application, the overhead added by using a managed language is not human noticeable (a couple of milliseconds won't perturb the average user). For me the real benefit of using one of the .NET languages (particularly C#) is the productivity it provides me with, both in terms of the language itself, and now the tools supporting it. This is in turn then handed on to the customer, as they get their software sooner, and to a higher standard than if I had to write all the plumbing myself (I can guarantee, that microsoft has far more test engineers at their disposal than I ever will, and will most likely have developers smarter than me, no matter how much we love to hate MS when things go wrong).
-
ya gimme a big hug thank you for your -> remainder but c# still thinks he is out of that but i have to use pointers in c# in that project, because of low speed of processing in an image processing part of that project ;)
modified on Wednesday, May 6, 2009 7:29 AM
-
An oversimplification, I admit. No I wouldn't write anything quick in C# - I use assembler for interrupt routines, or vanilla C. Though I have used C++ for embedded applications, with a little assembler at startup and for interrupts, I would not consider C# because of the memory requirements. But equally, I wouldn't want to write .NET applications in assembler (or C again)!
No trees were harmed in the sending of this message; however, a significant number of electrons were slightly inconvenienced. This message is made of fully recyclable Zeros and Ones
OriginalGriff wrote:
No I wouldn't write anything quick in C#
We've benchmarked C# versus C++, and found that well written C# is just as fast in all but a few specialised areas. It's worth knowing a bit about the CLI / JIT and which features to avoid unless absolutely necessary (dictionaries, interfaces & properties to name a few) if you want the best performance.
OriginalGriff wrote:
I would not consider C# because of the memory requirements.
Again, a knowledge of what's going on under the hood, and a bit of care in managing things, will give you assemblies that don't use any more memory than their C++ equivalents.
There are three kinds of people in the world - those who can count and those who can't...
-
OriginalGriff wrote:
No I wouldn't write anything quick in C#
We've benchmarked C# versus C++, and found that well written C# is just as fast in all but a few specialised areas. It's worth knowing a bit about the CLI / JIT and which features to avoid unless absolutely necessary (dictionaries, interfaces & properties to name a few) if you want the best performance.
OriginalGriff wrote:
I would not consider C# because of the memory requirements.
Again, a knowledge of what's going on under the hood, and a bit of care in managing things, will give you assemblies that don't use any more memory than their C++ equivalents.
There are three kinds of people in the world - those who can count and those who can't...
It's not the amount of memory that's the problem with embedded, it's the fragmentation! The last thing you need is a forced garbage collection under interrupt (Shudder).
No trees were harmed in the sending of this message; however, a significant number of electrons were slightly inconvenienced. This message is made of fully recyclable Zeros and Ones
-
It's not the amount of memory that's the problem with embedded, it's the fragmentation! The last thing you need is a forced garbage collection under interrupt (Shudder).
No trees were harmed in the sending of this message; however, a significant number of electrons were slightly inconvenienced. This message is made of fully recyclable Zeros and Ones
OriginalGriff wrote:
It's not the amount of memory that's the problem with embedded, it's the fragmentation! The last thing you need is a forced garbage collection under interrupt (Shudder).
True - that's why I added the "except in special cases" clause :) There are some things that you would never want to do in C#...
There are three kinds of people in the world - those who can count and those who can't...
-
And the perpendicular pronoun is supposed to a majuscule!
------------------------------------ "Children today are tyrants. They contradict their parents, gobble their food and tyrannize their teachers. I despair for the future." Socrates 400BC
And there's supposed to be a "be" in that bee-in-the-bonnet statement.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
-
I used to working on a big project, with lots of code and with a lot of customizable GUI, the name of the platform i was using was "wxwidgets" and it was a platform that is based on C++ ,I was learning lots of things especially in visual programming and i could do whatever i wanted because of strength of c++ and the platform itself and it had got a handy dandy (and simple) help , it was just a chm file that i could find all i wanted simply there but i migrated to C#, (and i used to be familiar with the technology of .NET especially C#) but now i feel that C# say nothing about anything , it stay you away of the real knowledge of visual programming (especially and other base concept in general term) and i feel if you want to learn c# especially by the means of books and videos you will just learn a shell of all is happening under the hood and you still can not find exactly what you want or maybe somethings doesn't exist to be found I want to know if you all programmers agree with me or you are not thank you all especially some of you that tell me about your idea about the issue thank you'all and i am talking about the technology of Microsoft Co. why all are talking about my style of writing or literature ?
modified on Wednesday, May 6, 2009 7:04 AM
cppwxwidgetsss wrote:
I want to know if you all programmers agree with me
With you? No. With the concept that I was barely able to determine within the horrible spelling and grammar? Yes. Of course .net and C# etc. hide a lot of stuff, that's the whole point. I've worked with both C# and C and there wasn't anything I did in C that couldn't have been done in C#. Others (including you) have had different experiences than I. "Use the right tool for the right job!" -- Scotty et al
cppwxwidgetsss wrote:
why all are talking about my style of writing or literature ?
Because you need to communicate clearly first and foremost. What idea you have doesn't matter if you can't communicate it. Einstein could come to me in a dream and tell me how to achieve useful time travel, but if he's speaking German he's wasting his breath.
