.Net 4.0 & C#4.0 Opinions
-
looking forward to fixing a lot of shitty, unreadable, convoluted and... shitty code due to the introduction of optional parameters* looking forward to fixing a lot of shitty, unreadable, convoluted and... shitty code due to the introduction of dynamic declarations* i am still hoping that if i continue to ignore wpf it will die the slow horible death it deserves ( not sure i will succeed on this one) *other people's code, of course
Opium is my business. The bridge mean more traffic. More traffic mean more money. More money mean more power. Speed is important in business. Time is money. You said opium was money. Money is Money. Well then, what is time again? icalburner
Member 1709723 wrote:
i am still hoping that if i continue to ignore wpf it will die the slow horible death it deserves ( not sure i will succeed on this one)
What makes you say that ? It has issues, but it's the nicest way to create compelling UI right now.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
I was thinking about the impending release of .Net 4.0/C# 4.0 and wondering whether or not I can be bothered (not that I've actually opened VS 2008 for a couple of months now, but it's handy to keep your toe in) - I'm sure the more eager amongst you will have checked out .Net 4.0 and the VS 2010 betas, so I thought I'd throw the question out "Is it worth it" and gather some opinions (I'm bored, it's raining and I've got nothing better to do :D ). From what I've read, particularly with reference to C#, the main areas of development are: 1) Parallelization 2) Dynamic language features & the DLR 3) Some (C#) language improvements to make Office/COM interop less of a pain in the jacksie, design by contract and some other stuff. 4) A rewrite of WWF. 5) Another stab at (or improvements to) Entity Framework. And that's about it (there are bound to be some other things, but those were the big five I found talked/blogged/pod-casted about most). Are any of these (or any other features you know about that I don't) enough to make you upgrade? the one that appeals to me most is the dynamic stuff (the DLR + IronPython more than C#'s dynamic features) but I could do without it - and the rest, I'm not so sure. The parallel stuff looks interesting, but runs the risk of being too close to bleeding edge and may well be superceded by something else quite quickly, the changes to WWF would make my blood boil if I had invested anything in the original release and I've avoided Entity Framework - only because I've not had much use for it. Also, is this release too soon?
print "http://www.codeproject.com".toURL().text Ain't that Groovy?
I'm looking forward to a ton of (hopefully) WPF fixes, but the thing that really makes me drool is Parallelization/Tasks.
A guide to posting questions on CodeProject[^]
Dave Kreskowiak Microsoft MVP Visual Developer - Visual Basic
2006, 2007, 2008 -
I'm looking forward to a ton of (hopefully) WPF fixes, but the thing that really makes me drool is Parallelization/Tasks.
A guide to posting questions on CodeProject[^]
Dave Kreskowiak Microsoft MVP Visual Developer - Visual Basic
2006, 2007, 2008I know there's a ton of things to fixed, have they said anything ?
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
I was thinking about the impending release of .Net 4.0/C# 4.0 and wondering whether or not I can be bothered (not that I've actually opened VS 2008 for a couple of months now, but it's handy to keep your toe in) - I'm sure the more eager amongst you will have checked out .Net 4.0 and the VS 2010 betas, so I thought I'd throw the question out "Is it worth it" and gather some opinions (I'm bored, it's raining and I've got nothing better to do :D ). From what I've read, particularly with reference to C#, the main areas of development are: 1) Parallelization 2) Dynamic language features & the DLR 3) Some (C#) language improvements to make Office/COM interop less of a pain in the jacksie, design by contract and some other stuff. 4) A rewrite of WWF. 5) Another stab at (or improvements to) Entity Framework. And that's about it (there are bound to be some other things, but those were the big five I found talked/blogged/pod-casted about most). Are any of these (or any other features you know about that I don't) enough to make you upgrade? the one that appeals to me most is the dynamic stuff (the DLR + IronPython more than C#'s dynamic features) but I could do without it - and the rest, I'm not so sure. The parallel stuff looks interesting, but runs the risk of being too close to bleeding edge and may well be superceded by something else quite quickly, the changes to WWF would make my blood boil if I had invested anything in the original release and I've avoided Entity Framework - only because I've not had much use for it. Also, is this release too soon?
print "http://www.codeproject.com".toURL().text Ain't that Groovy?
Well, Josh Fischer [^] has a decent article on the new features. Parallelization, when I looked at the TPL, it seemed cute, meaning it's easy to parallelize a for loop, but if you really need to work with threads to utilize processors and you really have real work that can be parallelized, then I think TPL is too simplistic, and really doesn't give you that much more. Sure, it hides some details, but so what? I'd rather work more closely with the API than have some additional layer wrap the management of threading. Optional parameters I've missed from the days of C++ since I started working with C#. About time. Dynamic variables seems pointless to me and probably a big performance hit, especially since it looks like the runtime is essentially using reflection to figure out if the object has the property. Everyone complains that declarative programming doesn't allow for compile-time type checking, yet "they" keep adding features to C# that move type checking into the runtime. :sigh: The co-contra variance looks very useful. Com Interop stuff looks like it'll be useful. I don't really care if they rewrite WWF, and am glad I'm not using it if that's the case. Entity Framework--why bother. There's better 3rd party solutions out there, and for anything real, the EF looks way to immature anyways. Marc
I'm not overthinking the problem, I just felt like I needed a small, unimportant, uninteresting rant! - Martin Hart Turner
-
Any news on if they've fixed any of the many bugs in WPF ?
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Christian Graus wrote:
Any news on if they've fixed any of the many bugs in WPF ?
Yeah, apparently they've fixed everything - and the fixes will be available to everyone without exception, the only exception being you. ;)
print "http://www.codeproject.com".toURL().text Ain't that Groovy?
-
Christian Graus wrote:
Any news on if they've fixed any of the many bugs in WPF ?
Yeah, apparently they've fixed everything - and the fixes will be available to everyone without exception, the only exception being you. ;)
print "http://www.codeproject.com".toURL().text Ain't that Groovy?
Well, that's typical.....
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
martin_hughes wrote:
- A rewrite of WWF.
Why? Why not WPF?
And there was me thinking all that balsa wood chair smashing was unscripted and spontaneous :sigh:
Help me! I'm turning into a grapefruit! Buzzwords!
-
Well, Josh Fischer [^] has a decent article on the new features. Parallelization, when I looked at the TPL, it seemed cute, meaning it's easy to parallelize a for loop, but if you really need to work with threads to utilize processors and you really have real work that can be parallelized, then I think TPL is too simplistic, and really doesn't give you that much more. Sure, it hides some details, but so what? I'd rather work more closely with the API than have some additional layer wrap the management of threading. Optional parameters I've missed from the days of C++ since I started working with C#. About time. Dynamic variables seems pointless to me and probably a big performance hit, especially since it looks like the runtime is essentially using reflection to figure out if the object has the property. Everyone complains that declarative programming doesn't allow for compile-time type checking, yet "they" keep adding features to C# that move type checking into the runtime. :sigh: The co-contra variance looks very useful. Com Interop stuff looks like it'll be useful. I don't really care if they rewrite WWF, and am glad I'm not using it if that's the case. Entity Framework--why bother. There's better 3rd party solutions out there, and for anything real, the EF looks way to immature anyways. Marc
I'm not overthinking the problem, I just felt like I needed a small, unimportant, uninteresting rant! - Martin Hart Turner
Marc Clifton wrote:
Optional parameters I've missed from the days of C++ since I started working with C#. About time.
Right and it's taken until version 4 to get them :confused:
Marc Clifton wrote:
Dynamic variables seems pointless to me
I didn't see the point either.
only two letters away from being an asset
-
Well, Josh Fischer [^] has a decent article on the new features. Parallelization, when I looked at the TPL, it seemed cute, meaning it's easy to parallelize a for loop, but if you really need to work with threads to utilize processors and you really have real work that can be parallelized, then I think TPL is too simplistic, and really doesn't give you that much more. Sure, it hides some details, but so what? I'd rather work more closely with the API than have some additional layer wrap the management of threading. Optional parameters I've missed from the days of C++ since I started working with C#. About time. Dynamic variables seems pointless to me and probably a big performance hit, especially since it looks like the runtime is essentially using reflection to figure out if the object has the property. Everyone complains that declarative programming doesn't allow for compile-time type checking, yet "they" keep adding features to C# that move type checking into the runtime. :sigh: The co-contra variance looks very useful. Com Interop stuff looks like it'll be useful. I don't really care if they rewrite WWF, and am glad I'm not using it if that's the case. Entity Framework--why bother. There's better 3rd party solutions out there, and for anything real, the EF looks way to immature anyways. Marc
I'm not overthinking the problem, I just felt like I needed a small, unimportant, uninteresting rant! - Martin Hart Turner
Excellent! I could not agree more with each of your points.
-
I think it has type covariance and contravariance which is something I've wanted for a while.
Yeah, ditto. It's one of those things that you think should work, but doesn't once you go try it:
var strings = new List() { "hello", "world" };
IEnumerable objectList = strings; // this works nowThe 3 big areas that affect me are
IEnumerable<T>,Action<T, ...>andFunc<T...> -
I was thinking about the impending release of .Net 4.0/C# 4.0 and wondering whether or not I can be bothered (not that I've actually opened VS 2008 for a couple of months now, but it's handy to keep your toe in) - I'm sure the more eager amongst you will have checked out .Net 4.0 and the VS 2010 betas, so I thought I'd throw the question out "Is it worth it" and gather some opinions (I'm bored, it's raining and I've got nothing better to do :D ). From what I've read, particularly with reference to C#, the main areas of development are: 1) Parallelization 2) Dynamic language features & the DLR 3) Some (C#) language improvements to make Office/COM interop less of a pain in the jacksie, design by contract and some other stuff. 4) A rewrite of WWF. 5) Another stab at (or improvements to) Entity Framework. And that's about it (there are bound to be some other things, but those were the big five I found talked/blogged/pod-casted about most). Are any of these (or any other features you know about that I don't) enough to make you upgrade? the one that appeals to me most is the dynamic stuff (the DLR + IronPython more than C#'s dynamic features) but I could do without it - and the rest, I'm not so sure. The parallel stuff looks interesting, but runs the risk of being too close to bleeding edge and may well be superceded by something else quite quickly, the changes to WWF would make my blood boil if I had invested anything in the original release and I've avoided Entity Framework - only because I've not had much use for it. Also, is this release too soon?
print "http://www.codeproject.com".toURL().text Ain't that Groovy?
martin_hughes wrote:
Also, is this release too soon?
Well, in general, it would be nice if MS slowed down a bit...
Kevin
-
looking forward to fixing a lot of shitty, unreadable, convoluted and... shitty code due to the introduction of optional parameters* looking forward to fixing a lot of shitty, unreadable, convoluted and... shitty code due to the introduction of dynamic declarations* i am still hoping that if i continue to ignore wpf it will die the slow horible death it deserves ( not sure i will succeed on this one) *other people's code, of course
Opium is my business. The bridge mean more traffic. More traffic mean more money. More money mean more power. Speed is important in business. Time is money. You said opium was money. Money is Money. Well then, what is time again? icalburner
Member 1709723 wrote:
looking forward to fixing a lot of sh***y, unreadable, convoluted and... sh***y code due to the introduction of optional parameters
Interestingly, in my C++ days I didn't mind them so much. But when I've encountered them when I've had to maintain VB .NET code they've been a real pain.
Kevin
-
Well, Josh Fischer [^] has a decent article on the new features. Parallelization, when I looked at the TPL, it seemed cute, meaning it's easy to parallelize a for loop, but if you really need to work with threads to utilize processors and you really have real work that can be parallelized, then I think TPL is too simplistic, and really doesn't give you that much more. Sure, it hides some details, but so what? I'd rather work more closely with the API than have some additional layer wrap the management of threading. Optional parameters I've missed from the days of C++ since I started working with C#. About time. Dynamic variables seems pointless to me and probably a big performance hit, especially since it looks like the runtime is essentially using reflection to figure out if the object has the property. Everyone complains that declarative programming doesn't allow for compile-time type checking, yet "they" keep adding features to C# that move type checking into the runtime. :sigh: The co-contra variance looks very useful. Com Interop stuff looks like it'll be useful. I don't really care if they rewrite WWF, and am glad I'm not using it if that's the case. Entity Framework--why bother. There's better 3rd party solutions out there, and for anything real, the EF looks way to immature anyways. Marc
I'm not overthinking the problem, I just felt like I needed a small, unimportant, uninteresting rant! - Martin Hart Turner
Marc Clifton wrote:
Parallelization, when I looked at the TPL, it seemed cute, meaning it's easy to parallelize a for loop, but if you really need to work with threads to utilize processors and you really have real work that can be parallelized, then I think TPL is too simplistic
I hope you give it a fair try, it's really so much more than parallelizing loops.
Religiously blogging on the intarwebs since the early 21st century: Kineti L'Tziyon Judah Himango
-
Any news on if they've fixed any of the many bugs in WPF ?
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
-
I know there's a ton of things to fixed, have they said anything ?
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Not that I've heard, but then again, I haven't exactly been reading a ton of blog posts lately either. My time is filled by watching my 14 month old's face as he steps into a puddle and stomps his feet for the first time. To him, it turned out to be the coolest thing on earth. For me, it turned out to be the coolest thing on this earth! :cool:
A guide to posting questions on CodeProject[^]
Dave Kreskowiak Microsoft MVP Visual Developer - Visual Basic
2006, 2007, 2008 -
And here I was thinking they write them so I have stuff to blog about.....
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Yeah, I have popcorn ready for you and the release date. :laugh:
Cheetah. Ferret. Gonads. What more can I say? - Pete O'Hanlon
-
Wow. I think a Microsoft employee signed up recently; you got univoted. Fixed
Between the idea And the reality Between the motion And the act Falls the Shadow
-
martin_hughes wrote:
Also, is this release too soon?
Well, in general, it would be nice if MS slowed down a bit...
Kevin
-
Member 1709723 wrote:
i am still hoping that if i continue to ignore wpf it will die the slow horible death it deserves ( not sure i will succeed on this one)
What makes you say that ? It has issues, but it's the nicest way to create compelling UI right now.
Christian Graus Driven to the arms of OSX by Vista. Read my blog to find out how I've worked around bugs in Microsoft tools and frameworks.
Christian Graus wrote:
[WPF is] the nicest way to create compelling UI right now
OK, either you missed the joke icon, or.... who are you, and what did you do to the real CG? :suss:
Cheers, Vikram. (Proud to have finally cracked a CCC!)
Recent activities: TV series: Friends, season 10 Books: Fooled by Randomness, by Nassim Nicholas Taleb.
Carpe Diem.
-
Marc Clifton wrote:
Parallelization, when I looked at the TPL, it seemed cute, meaning it's easy to parallelize a for loop, but if you really need to work with threads to utilize processors and you really have real work that can be parallelized, then I think TPL is too simplistic
I hope you give it a fair try, it's really so much more than parallelizing loops.
Religiously blogging on the intarwebs since the early 21st century: Kineti L'Tziyon Judah Himango
Judah Himango wrote:
I hope you give it a fair try, it's really so much more than parallelizing loops.
I will definitely look at it again with .NET 4.0. But should I expect anything different from what I wrote about already here?[^] Marc
I'm not overthinking the problem, I just felt like I needed a small, unimportant, uninteresting rant! - Martin Hart Turner