.NET is killing natural of programming from inside !?
-
its just a private idea , really .net is not killing natural of programming? i mean in .net sometimes with one line you can do something wich needs more than 10 lines! it makes programming so simple and faster but in this situations i dnt feel im programming really ! maybe because my codes complete so fast :laugh: ! whats your idea? agree or not?
No - it's just moving the "grunt work" into a tested, reliable code base. Just as we all used to do ourselves, but with that code base being consistent and shared among a huge number of users instead of different for each company or even programmer. All .NET does is let us concentrate on the application instead of getting bogged down by the details of the low level stuff we have written so many times before.
If you get an email telling you that you can catch Swine Flu from tinned pork then just delete it. It's Spam.
-
its just a private idea , really .net is not killing natural of programming? i mean in .net sometimes with one line you can do something wich needs more than 10 lines! it makes programming so simple and faster but in this situations i dnt feel im programming really ! maybe because my codes complete so fast :laugh: ! whats your idea? agree or not?
source.compiler wrote:
agree or not?
I don't agree.
source.compiler wrote:
really .net is not killing natural of programming?
No. My idea is: programming in .NET is 'natural of programming'.
In some cases, my signature will be longer than my message...
<em style="color:red"> <b>ProgramFOX</b></em>
ProgramFOX
-
its just a private idea , really .net is not killing natural of programming? i mean in .net sometimes with one line you can do something wich needs more than 10 lines! it makes programming so simple and faster but in this situations i dnt feel im programming really ! maybe because my codes complete so fast :laugh: ! whats your idea? agree or not?
I appreciate the feeling. .Net is fine for write-today run-it-tomorrow then throw-it-away software but I wouldn't want to use it for anything 'serious'. Not that the there's anything wrong with the codebase, it's just that the best programmers are control freaks and having your code entirely based on and wrapped up in closed-source or semi-open-source code that somebody else controls, never feels good. It's the same with Java, all great stuff but why didn't they just ship the whole runtime as a class library I can use in the way I choose? Why make me write in Java to use it when it was originally written in C/C++ anyway? The answer is of course they're control freaks too and want to make me do it their way. With Microsoft its all about saving developer support costs. If they don't let you write code that crashes they can't get a bad rep from bad apps written by people who don't know waht they're doing who then cost them a fortune in support aswell. That's what .Net was for and it does a great job. Thanks very much Microsoft but I don't need it.
"The secret of happiness is freedom, and the secret of freedom, courage." Thucydides (B.C. 460-400)
-
its just a private idea , really .net is not killing natural of programming? i mean in .net sometimes with one line you can do something wich needs more than 10 lines! it makes programming so simple and faster but in this situations i dnt feel im programming really ! maybe because my codes complete so fast :laugh: ! whats your idea? agree or not?
I have been thinking that for almost 35 years. On my little computer back then the normal way to write a program was machine language. Simple assemblers were available, but took away too much of your little memory. Or you could expand the memory and run Tiny BASIC, or a 'full' BASIC if you got yourself even more RAM. I always stayed on the low level side and got better results with less hardware and at a smaller price. Just because we have far stronger processors and much more memory now, that's no reason to get wasteful. And, what's worse, we have been isolated from what the compiler actually makes out of our source code. Often enough I have seen people do crazy things, totally unaware that memory still is limited and that even the strongest processor has no chance against brute force approaches. And I have also seen how helpless they can become when one of their 'silver bullets' fails.
-
I appreciate the feeling. .Net is fine for write-today run-it-tomorrow then throw-it-away software but I wouldn't want to use it for anything 'serious'. Not that the there's anything wrong with the codebase, it's just that the best programmers are control freaks and having your code entirely based on and wrapped up in closed-source or semi-open-source code that somebody else controls, never feels good. It's the same with Java, all great stuff but why didn't they just ship the whole runtime as a class library I can use in the way I choose? Why make me write in Java to use it when it was originally written in C/C++ anyway? The answer is of course they're control freaks too and want to make me do it their way. With Microsoft its all about saving developer support costs. If they don't let you write code that crashes they can't get a bad rep from bad apps written by people who don't know waht they're doing who then cost them a fortune in support aswell. That's what .Net was for and it does a great job. Thanks very much Microsoft but I don't need it.
"The secret of happiness is freedom, and the secret of freedom, courage." Thucydides (B.C. 460-400)
Not so long ago I have been told here that we will be 'left behind' if we don't want to 'embrace' Win 8. What a joke. From a company's perspective there may not be anything better than a large herd of sheep who faithfully runs in the direction they point. So you are also one of the black sheep who don't mind being 'left behind'? The sort that likes to use its horns to ram obstacles out of the way instead of letting some tool or gadget do it Mickeysoft's (or anybody else's) 'right way'?
-
its just a private idea , really .net is not killing natural of programming? i mean in .net sometimes with one line you can do something wich needs more than 10 lines! it makes programming so simple and faster but in this situations i dnt feel im programming really ! maybe because my codes complete so fast :laugh: ! whats your idea? agree or not?
((TypesFactory.TypeOf("C guy"))I).doNotAgree(writtenInASingleLineoflen(500).insteadOf("10 readable lines in C")); (1) (1) (void* (__cdecl * pfnEval)(void*, void*) missed for clarity
Nuclear launch detected
-
I appreciate the feeling. .Net is fine for write-today run-it-tomorrow then throw-it-away software but I wouldn't want to use it for anything 'serious'. Not that the there's anything wrong with the codebase, it's just that the best programmers are control freaks and having your code entirely based on and wrapped up in closed-source or semi-open-source code that somebody else controls, never feels good. It's the same with Java, all great stuff but why didn't they just ship the whole runtime as a class library I can use in the way I choose? Why make me write in Java to use it when it was originally written in C/C++ anyway? The answer is of course they're control freaks too and want to make me do it their way. With Microsoft its all about saving developer support costs. If they don't let you write code that crashes they can't get a bad rep from bad apps written by people who don't know waht they're doing who then cost them a fortune in support aswell. That's what .Net was for and it does a great job. Thanks very much Microsoft but I don't need it.
"The secret of happiness is freedom, and the secret of freedom, courage." Thucydides (B.C. 460-400)
Java is that thing that becomes the main attack vector, right? (Wonder how many banks are using applets of client side - the horror! - and the same that got the boot from Apple yet again).
Nuclear launch detected
-
No - it's just moving the "grunt work" into a tested, reliable code base. Just as we all used to do ourselves, but with that code base being consistent and shared among a huge number of users instead of different for each company or even programmer. All .NET does is let us concentrate on the application instead of getting bogged down by the details of the low level stuff we have written so many times before.
If you get an email telling you that you can catch Swine Flu from tinned pork then just delete it. It's Spam.
OriginalGriff wrote:
All .NET does is let us concentrate on the application instead of getting bogged down by the details of the low level stuff we have written so many times before.
You forgot the most important factor: It also fills Microsoft's pockets. By now and then dropping something and sharing their latest great vision with us, they also want to make sure that we keep on buying their stuff. That's the point where .Net has begun to cost me more than it is worth. I now refuse to waste my time adapting my code or learning stuff that will only be dropped again at the next opportunity.
-
OriginalGriff wrote:
All .NET does is let us concentrate on the application instead of getting bogged down by the details of the low level stuff we have written so many times before.
You forgot the most important factor: It also fills Microsoft's pockets. By now and then dropping something and sharing their latest great vision with us, they also want to make sure that we keep on buying their stuff. That's the point where .Net has begun to cost me more than it is worth. I now refuse to waste my time adapting my code or learning stuff that will only be dropped again at the next opportunity.
.NET has lasted ten years now (V1.1 came out with VS2003!) which is pretty good going these days. Yes, it makes MS money - but it's not quite as bad as Office, where you have to update your whole company because one of your customers upgraded and you can't read their documents any more! :mad: Don't get me wrong - I came up through the machine-code/assembler/c/c++ route after starting Uni with COBOL and FORTRAN - it's not the best it could be. But it does cut development and maintenance time considerably by removing the need to recode and retest a linked list every time, and a string class, and a ... It's certainly a shed load better than MFC ever was!
If you get an email telling you that you can catch Swine Flu from tinned pork then just delete it. It's Spam.
-
its just a private idea , really .net is not killing natural of programming? i mean in .net sometimes with one line you can do something wich needs more than 10 lines! it makes programming so simple and faster but in this situations i dnt feel im programming really ! maybe because my codes complete so fast :laugh: ! whats your idea? agree or not?
In the end programming is programming - meaning you can be as sloppy in assembler as you can be in .Net or you can write beautiful code. .Net just helps me organise my ideas and work, because it is object oriented its does a lot of the hard work for me. For example I can define a form in a SQL Server database and then write a class that reads the definition and displays the form to the user so that I can administer the forms from a SQL Server database. I can also limit what the users can access in the .Net application by defining all of this again in a SQL Server database. At the SQL Server end I don't even need to be aware of the intricacies of the .Net applications accessing it - I think this is amazing. My first computer having been a 48K ZX Spectrum I have nothing but admiration for how easy Microsoft have made my life and how fast I can create working applications for users(sure the .Net framework could be improved but it suits my needs).
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
-
In the end programming is programming - meaning you can be as sloppy in assembler as you can be in .Net or you can write beautiful code. .Net just helps me organise my ideas and work, because it is object oriented its does a lot of the hard work for me. For example I can define a form in a SQL Server database and then write a class that reads the definition and displays the form to the user so that I can administer the forms from a SQL Server database. I can also limit what the users can access in the .Net application by defining all of this again in a SQL Server database. At the SQL Server end I don't even need to be aware of the intricacies of the .Net applications accessing it - I think this is amazing. My first computer having been a 48K ZX Spectrum I have nothing but admiration for how easy Microsoft have made my life and how fast I can create working applications for users(sure the .Net framework could be improved but it suits my needs).
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
I'll be switching to LLVM & Clang this year. (using emscripten you can even generate javascript from the compiled C++) I used to think .NET was a good thing, but the number of versions plus the updates to fix holes in the framework is ridiculous. That, and the fact Windows OS is becoming less and less relevant these days. It's iOS / Android / Linux where the cool stuff happens. There's nothing wrong with C# or F# per se, just that they're being driven by Microsoft and that's the real problem. As one poster has already stated, it's just being used to continue/promote use of their products.
-
its just a private idea , really .net is not killing natural of programming? i mean in .net sometimes with one line you can do something wich needs more than 10 lines! it makes programming so simple and faster but in this situations i dnt feel im programming really ! maybe because my codes complete so fast :laugh: ! whats your idea? agree or not?
On the contrary, Dotnet has improved my productivity. If I'm asked to complete something called A that needs to tell B via C I want to do that without faffing around doing minute coding tasks that don't really add anything but complexity. Don't get me wrong, I've done embedded development where register mapping and page boundaries were essential considerations. I'd still love to do that kind of work again but I'll use what's right for the task. If I can do in one line what I'd previously had to do in ten, then give me one line. Just because you like to do soemthing in ten doesn't mean you're smarter than the next bloke. Given the chance I'd rather work smart than work hard.
"I do not have to forgive my enemies, I have had them all shot." — Ramón Maria Narváez (1800-68). "I don't need to shoot my enemies, I don't have any." - Me (2012).
-
a calculator also can be interesting if you make it with new ways! dnt agree? in first version you write anything in one class, in second you involve inheritance, in third version you involve threads and delegates ,... as you see a simple programm can be interesting with new and great codes ! dont agree?
-
source.compiler wrote:
agree or not?
I don't agree.
source.compiler wrote:
really .net is not killing natural of programming?
No. My idea is: programming in .NET is 'natural of programming'.
In some cases, my signature will be longer than my message...
<em style="color:red"> <b>ProgramFOX</b></em>
ProgramFOX
in my idea coding is many codes ,many dim lines !
-
I appreciate the feeling. .Net is fine for write-today run-it-tomorrow then throw-it-away software but I wouldn't want to use it for anything 'serious'. Not that the there's anything wrong with the codebase, it's just that the best programmers are control freaks and having your code entirely based on and wrapped up in closed-source or semi-open-source code that somebody else controls, never feels good. It's the same with Java, all great stuff but why didn't they just ship the whole runtime as a class library I can use in the way I choose? Why make me write in Java to use it when it was originally written in C/C++ anyway? The answer is of course they're control freaks too and want to make me do it their way. With Microsoft its all about saving developer support costs. If they don't let you write code that crashes they can't get a bad rep from bad apps written by people who don't know waht they're doing who then cost them a fortune in support aswell. That's what .Net was for and it does a great job. Thanks very much Microsoft but I don't need it.
"The secret of happiness is freedom, and the secret of freedom, courage." Thucydides (B.C. 460-400)
im agree with you, microsoft has many useful products for developers ! and its really useful for huge projects ! and microsoft is my favourite company , and it has good products ,you can use or not!:thumbsup:
-
I have been thinking that for almost 35 years. On my little computer back then the normal way to write a program was machine language. Simple assemblers were available, but took away too much of your little memory. Or you could expand the memory and run Tiny BASIC, or a 'full' BASIC if you got yourself even more RAM. I always stayed on the low level side and got better results with less hardware and at a smaller price. Just because we have far stronger processors and much more memory now, that's no reason to get wasteful. And, what's worse, we have been isolated from what the compiler actually makes out of our source code. Often enough I have seen people do crazy things, totally unaware that memory still is limited and that even the strongest processor has no chance against brute force approaches. And I have also seen how helpless they can become when one of their 'silver bullets' fails.
-
No - it's just moving the "grunt work" into a tested, reliable code base. Just as we all used to do ourselves, but with that code base being consistent and shared among a huge number of users instead of different for each company or even programmer. All .NET does is let us concentrate on the application instead of getting bogged down by the details of the low level stuff we have written so many times before.
If you get an email telling you that you can catch Swine Flu from tinned pork then just delete it. It's Spam.
yes you are right ! but i am talking about Programming , not programming projects ! someone rich doesnt need do projects , he/she wanna code for fun and wanna feel joy of programming , and microsoft just help to do programming !
-
You have been thinking that for 35 years, is this a joke? The first Beta of Microsoft's .NET technology came out in 2000. And I don't think it's 2035 yet.
-
yes you are right ! but i am talking about Programming , not programming projects ! someone rich doesnt need do projects , he/she wanna code for fun and wanna feel joy of programming , and microsoft just help to do programming !
So am I. Low level code is fun to do: I have been involved with embedded software for most of my working life. But there is very, very little satisfaction from reinventing the wheel - particularly if you do it over and over with each new programming job you do. .NET allows you to focus on your code, your task - without having to write a combobox from scratch (which is a very,. very dull thing to do and get right). It's about freeing your time and making your effort more effective. Yes, it is a very good idea to know what is going on "behind the scenes" - but it shouldn't be the only thing you try to do! And you don't have to be rich to code with .NET, even as a complete amateur - each and every version of VS has included free Express editions which miss out very little that an amateur would need.
If you get an email telling you that you can catch Swine Flu from tinned pork then just delete it. It's Spam.
-
a calculator also can be interesting if you make it with new ways! dnt agree? in first version you write anything in one class, in second you involve inheritance, in third version you involve threads and delegates ,... as you see a simple programm can be interesting with new and great codes ! dont agree?
Maybe.. that sort of sounds like making it complex just for the sake of complexity though. How about a calculator that can parse formula's and do symbolic differentiation? Now that's pretty interesting, and the fact that you'd be working in C# doesn't really kill the fun.
