Argh - C# can really SUCK !!!!

Shaun Wilde

Off topic - but what do you recommend - SVG or VML? Can svg do inline like you can vml or do you always have to get the .svg as an image? thanks

Stupidity dies. The end of future offspring. Evolution wins. - A Darwin Awards Haiku

George

Tomasz Sowinski wrote: Because you can't design pages visually with MC++. That's what you get for using the beta-quality product which is what VS.NET is. :laugh: Tomasz Sowinski wrote: MC++ is here mostly for interop. I think it's rather to "embrace and extend".

/* I C++, therefore I am... */

Tomasz Sowinski

George wrote: That's what you get for using the beta-quality product which is what VS.NET is Regardless of quality, you'd have to be masochist to use MC++ for ASP.NET, even if there would be no VS issues. George wrote: I think it's rather to "embrace and extend". To embrace what? Tomasz Sowinski -- http://www.shooltz.com

*** Vodka. Connecting people. ***

Paul Watson

Shaun Wilde wrote: but what do you recommend - SVG or VML? SVG. It is a standard, it is fully XML, it is pretty cool. Shaun Wilde wrote: Can svg do inline like you can vml or do you always have to get the .svg as an image? http://www.protocol7.com/svg-wiki/default.asp?InlineExamples[^]

Paul Watson
Bluegrass
Cape Town, South Africa

Daniel Turini

Christian Graus wrote: I have a method which returns a bool for success or failure, and takes an XPath and an int, the int gets populated with the value of the XPath. The XPath is turned into a node calling an internal function called 'FindNode'. Here's the rub. If I make the int a ref, it won't compile unless I give it an initial value. If I make it an out, I can't compile at all, because I call an external function within my function. I need to give i a default value within my function, just to make it compile..... It's more probable there's a mistake in your design. Think the 'out' attribute on a parameter the same as the const-ness of a C++ variable. You shouldn't cast-out a const to a non-const. Probably you are passing the out parameter to a function as a non-out parameter. This is a no-no. "In an organization, each person rises to the level of his own incompetence." Peter's Principle

George

Tomasz Sowinski wrote: Regardless of quality, you'd have to be masochist to use MC++ for ASP.NET, even if there would be no VS issues. You are already a masochist to work with ASP or ASP.NET or C#. Why not make a one more step? ;) Tomasz Sowinski wrote: To embrace what? C++. Why else there would be all that commotion around C++ compliance (aka embrace) and garbage collection ("extend") in Microsoft? The lack of certain ("visual") features specifically in C++ part of VS.NET gives it out clearly. The "new" IDE that looks just like the good old Visual Interdev or Visual Basic gives another clue. VS.NET IDE sucks for C++ development. They tried the same trick with Netscape and Java, it might be worth to try with C++. Just think about it...

/* I C++, therefore I am... */

David Stone

Oh it's very painful. If you're going to go the Notepad.NET route, then I would suggest hopping over to www.asp.net[^] and getting WebMatrix. It's the free ASP.NET editor that the ASP.NET team put together on their free time... Norm Almond: I seen some GUI's in my life but WTF is this mess ;-) Leppie: I made an app for my sister and she wouldnt use it till it was colorful enough:) Norm:good point leppie, from that statement I can only deduce that this GUI must be aimed at children:laugh: Leppie:My sister is 25:eek: -Norm on the MailMagic GUI

KaRl

Tomasz Sowinski wrote: *** Vodka. Connecting people. *** Pursuing the polish dream... ;) So I came to find To end up this way Feeling like I'm God Feeling there's no way KoRn, "No Way"

Tomasz Sowinski

George wrote: You are already a masochist to work with ASP or ASP.NET or C#. Why not make a one more step? Why do I have a feeling that you don't have a clue what you're talking about? Never mind. What would you suggest for non-masochistic web application development? George wrote: They tried the same trick with Netscape and Java, it might be worth to try with C++. Well, actually they provided nice extensions to Java and better browser than Netscape. With MC++ there's not much worth investigating if you don't plan to reuse your C++ code. Tomasz Sowinski -- http://www.shooltz.com

*** Vodka. Connecting people. ***

Shaun Wilde

thanks - I was swaying towards VML as it is for IE only and I could find loads of examples on inline VML (even here on codetools) but nothing on SVG. but I think your right it is better to stick with a standard.

Stupidity dies. The end of future offspring. Evolution wins. - A Darwin Awards Haiku

George

Tomasz Sowinski wrote: Why do I have a feeling that you don't have a clue what you're talking about? Because you don't know me? ;P Tomasz Sowinski wrote: What would you suggest for non-masochistic web application development? First of all I would suggest to avoid the web application development itself. Failing that, use C++. For example in my current job we have a nice ActiveX stuffed on the webpage that effectively is a web application. It's all in C++ and we have only about 10kB of the HTML/asp code to wrap that ActiveX all together. You get the power of C++ with all the goodies of web, like easy deployment or database access. What you don't get is the typical "web application crap", like asp pages. I've been actually porting some old asp code to that ActiveX architecture, and I can tell that asp really sucks and I don't see ASP.NET or C# being any better. Generally it all depends on the life expectancy of your application. If it's supposed to be used for a week or two use C#, VB, ASP or whatever. But for the long run you need a serious tool that allows you to get the job done properly and that tools often turns to be C++. Tomasz Sowinski wrote: Well, actually they provided nice extensions to Java and better browser than Netscape. "Nice" is a very relative term. Browser from Microsoft is not better, it's rather the Netscape was worse - they clearly dropped the ball at some point. Tomasz Sowinski wrote: With MC++ there's not much worth investigating if you don't plan to reuse your C++ code. I am not sure what are you trying to say here. But I find latest Herb's comments that MC++ and C++ Standard have the same goals very fit to my theory. Let's hope I am wrong on that one...

/* I C++, therefore I am... */

Paul Watson

Shaun Wilde wrote: but nothing on SVG. but I think your right it is better to stick with a standard. Christian and I are both submitting SVG articles soon, so there should be some good fodder in there. Plus there is quite a bit on the net, just ask if you want links and feel free to ask questions here on the forums.

Paul Watson
Bluegrass
Cape Town, South Africa

Tomasz Sowinski

George wrote: Because you don't know me? Good reason :) George wrote: First of all I would suggest to avoid the web application development itself. Why? Should CodeProject be created as .exe which we'd have to download? George wrote: For example in my current job we have a nice ActiveX stuffed on the webpage that effectively is a web application So you've limited the reach of your web appplication to IE users on Win32 who are careless enough to enable ActiveX. George wrote: asp really sucks and I don't see ASP.NET or C# being any better. Yes, asp sucks. But if you can't see the great (positive) difference with ASP.NET you surely have some vision problems :) George wrote: Browser from Microsoft is not better, it's rather the Netscape was worse - they clearly dropped the ball at some point. You talk like lawyer right now :) Tomasz Sowinski -- http://www.shooltz.com

*** Vodka. Connecting people. ***

George

Tomasz Sowinski wrote: Why? Should CodeProject be created as .exe which we'd have to download? There is no connection here - CodeProject being a website doesn't make sense as an .exe. But, given the articles/posts ration it would probably do well as a newgroup + good old-fashioned HTML-based website... Tomasz Sowinski wrote: So you've limited the reach of your web appplication to IE users on Win32 who are careless enough to enable ActiveX. Since it's an internal application for rather large company it isn't a problem at all - all PC's and their setup is strictly controlled to the point that we only have to make our appplication working with a single version of IE. When I say version I mean a full version like 5.50.4807.0001. It doesn't have to work any other release! ;) Tomasz Sowinski wrote: Yes, asp sucks. But if you can't see the great (positive) difference with ASP.NET you surely have some vision problems It may be a positive difference, but I can see even more possitive difference between ASP.NET and C++. My vision is perfrectly clear on that! Tomasz Sowinski wrote: You talk like lawyer right now I've seen Netscape and IE evolving and at the start Netscape was much better than IE. Then they started to sue MS and generally went down with the product, which killed them ultimately. Loosers!

/* I C++, therefore I am... */

Phil J Pearson

I understand your annoyance but I don't really see it as a problem. I almost always initialise variables anyway, even in C++. 1. It stops the compiler moaning. 2. It sometimes makes debugging easier; you can make the initial value one that the variable wouldn't normally have so you can recognise it and know that no assignment has happened. I think the C# behaviour is probably a Good Thing on the whole.

The opinions expressed in this communication do not necessarily represent those of the author (especially if you find them impolite, discourteous or inflammatory).

William E Kempf

George wrote: The lack of certain ("visual") features specifically in C++ part of VS.NET gives it out clearly. Gives what out clearly? And BTW, WinForm support is supposed to exist for MC++ in VS.NET 7.1, due out RSN, so if you want to make up facts for some conspiracy theory you'd better pick a new one ;). George wrote: VS.NET IDE sucks for C++ development. Funny... I use it daily for C++ development, and I have no complaints. William E. Kempf

Tomasz Sowinski

George wrote: Since it's an internal application for rather large company it isn't a problem at all It'll work in this scenario. However, it's totally inappropriate for applications targeted at general audience. George wrote: I can see even more possitive difference between ASP.NET and C++. My vision is perfrectly clear on that! Ok. Next time you create a interactive website using C++ let me know :) George wrote: I've seen Netscape and IE evolving and at the start Netscape was much better than IE No, IE was just much worse than Netscape at the beginning. :) Tomasz Sowinski -- http://www.shooltz.com

*** Vodka. Connecting people. ***

Chris Maunder

MC++ does not (yet) work with ASP.NET. It *looks* like it works, it smells like it works, but pretty soon it will crash your ASP.NET apps. Everett fixes this issue. cheers, Chris Maunder

Chris Maunder

A code sample would be helpful. cheers, Chris Maunder

William E Kempf

George wrote: Since it's an internal application for rather large company it isn't a problem at all - all PC's and their setup is strictly controlled to the point that we only have to make our appplication working with a single version of IE. When I say version I mean a full version like 5.50.4807.0001. It doesn't have to work any other release! This, with other comments you've made, make me wonder why you've developed this for the web at all! The excuse "because they don't have to install anything, and upgrades are automatic" is flawed, because there are numerous ways to accomplish this with out creating an application that runs inside the browser. .NET, in fact, provides a solution for this. The nice thing about these solutions: 1) they don't lock you into any specific browser or worse (in your case) browser version, 2) they don't force you to "hack" away at complex solutions to avoid the short comings of browser based application development (which you're doing from your description), 3) they provide solutions that make loading the application MUCH faster making your app more usable. I can't think of a single good reason to go down the path you have (and honestly there's few good reasons for any kind of web application, IMNSHO). William E. Kempf