C# features
-
I went from Assembler to C to C++ to C# - and haven't looked back! The productivity improvement is absolutely priceless. Now, if I was still doing embedded work it would be different, but ... :-D
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony "Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
Yeah, barely had an introduction to Assembly (VAX Macro 11), quite a bit of C, just a dabbling of C++, and now C# for the past twenty years.
-
I’m writing my main project in c++ but in order to get better at c++ I need to improve my c# skills. My question is what should a person learn after getting comfortable with variables, lists and classes in C#. I remember seeing helper constructs that make certain operations when dealing with lists easier but at that time I could not understand them. What would be your recommendation for let’s say top four things to know after learning the basics in C#?
Calin Negru wrote:
to get better at c++ I need to improve my c# skills
Why do you think this ?blockquote class="quote">
Calin Negru wrote:
I remember seeing helper constructs that make certain operations when dealing with lists easier but at that time I could not understand themCan you understand them now ? Study LINQ !
«The mind is not a vessel to be filled but a fire to be kindled» Plutarch
-
I can strongly recommend C# in Depth[^]. You can buy copies from Amazon.
Thanks for the suggestion
-
Then you want to learn "patterns"; not languages. The architect learns about windows and doors before flying butresses.
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
A lot of C# features are probably there for dealing with specific tasks ( “link” is for working with databases, etc. ) But I’m sure there are also features useful for any type of project too >Then you want to learn patterns. I can’t imagine a learning resource that teaches abstract programming rules.
-
A lot of C# features are probably there for dealing with specific tasks ( “link” is for working with databases, etc. ) But I’m sure there are also features useful for any type of project too >Then you want to learn patterns. I can’t imagine a learning resource that teaches abstract programming rules.
You don't need wood and bricks to learn about windows.
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
-
A lot of C# features are probably there for dealing with specific tasks ( “link” is for working with databases, etc. ) But I’m sure there are also features useful for any type of project too >Then you want to learn patterns. I can’t imagine a learning resource that teaches abstract programming rules.
Calin Negru wrote:
“link” is for working with databases, etc.
linq (spelling) was not added to deal with databases. It was added as a result of a surge of interest, or at least perceived interest, in functional programming. Then someone decided it would be a 'good' idea to use linq to access databases. They were wrong. They were not also the first ones to think that a generic in language source would somehow be better for database access. Long before that C++ (or maybe java) had an alternative in the language (sort of) for SQL. But it never took off. Probably for the similar reasons as it made simple problems simpler (which was never a complaint) but complex problems either difficult or even impossible to deal with.
-
Calin Negru wrote:
“link” is for working with databases, etc.
linq (spelling) was not added to deal with databases. It was added as a result of a surge of interest, or at least perceived interest, in functional programming. Then someone decided it would be a 'good' idea to use linq to access databases. They were wrong. They were not also the first ones to think that a generic in language source would somehow be better for database access. Long before that C++ (or maybe java) had an alternative in the language (sort of) for SQL. But it never took off. Probably for the similar reasons as it made simple problems simpler (which was never a complaint) but complex problems either difficult or even impossible to deal with.
LINQ doesn't "do databases"; it does "data models". The "source" of the model varies: database; objects; XML. An architecture that allows for "new" types of sources. Most issues are due to not understanding the client / server relationship and the purpose of stored procedures.
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
-
Calin Negru wrote:
“link” is for working with databases, etc.
linq (spelling) was not added to deal with databases. It was added as a result of a surge of interest, or at least perceived interest, in functional programming. Then someone decided it would be a 'good' idea to use linq to access databases. They were wrong. They were not also the first ones to think that a generic in language source would somehow be better for database access. Long before that C++ (or maybe java) had an alternative in the language (sort of) for SQL. But it never took off. Probably for the similar reasons as it made simple problems simpler (which was never a complaint) but complex problems either difficult or even impossible to deal with.
Gerry, jschell The problem is I’m not programming a server or a client or anything that has to do with databases. Besides there is nothing in c++ like it AFAICT I’ve had a brief contact with C# list accessories ( the stuff used to interact with a list in different ways) it seems like that’s what I’m looking for. C++ vector has some of those things too.
-
Gerry, jschell The problem is I’m not programming a server or a client or anything that has to do with databases. Besides there is nothing in c++ like it AFAICT I’ve had a brief contact with C# list accessories ( the stuff used to interact with a list in different ways) it seems like that’s what I’m looking for. C++ vector has some of those things too.
I have an in-memory collection; it contains "blocks"; these blocks represent different types of troops; these troops belong to different "teams". Some blocks (brigades) have other blocks as children. Some blocks don't belong to any team. If I wanted to retrieve all "blue" infantry that were not currently in action, etc .... that's LINQ "to objects". LINQ, when used properly, gets rid of a pile of if's and for loops while doing "object oriented programming". If you're strictly "procedural", then none of this works for you.
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
-
I have an in-memory collection; it contains "blocks"; these blocks represent different types of troops; these troops belong to different "teams". Some blocks (brigades) have other blocks as children. Some blocks don't belong to any team. If I wanted to retrieve all "blue" infantry that were not currently in action, etc .... that's LINQ "to objects". LINQ, when used properly, gets rid of a pile of if's and for loops while doing "object oriented programming". If you're strictly "procedural", then none of this works for you.
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
Thanks for sharing Gerry
-
LINQ doesn't "do databases"; it does "data models". The "source" of the model varies: database; objects; XML. An architecture that allows for "new" types of sources. Most issues are due to not understanding the client / server relationship and the purpose of stored procedures.
"Before entering on an understanding, I have meditated for a long time, and have foreseen what might happen. It is not genius which reveals to me suddenly, secretly, what I have to say or to do in a circumstance unexpected by other people; it is reflection, it is meditation." - Napoleon I
Gerry Schmitz wrote:
LINQ doesn't "do databases"; it does "data models". The "source" of the model varies: database; objects; XML
No idea how that changes what I said.
Gerry Schmitz wrote:
Most issues are due to not understanding the client / server relationship and the purpose of stored procedures.
I can't speak as to the source of of your "most" comment. But I can speak as to the problems I found of which I do not believe any had to do with stored procedures.
-
Calin Negru wrote:
to get better at c++ I need to improve my c# skills
Why do you think this ?blockquote class="quote">
Calin Negru wrote:
I remember seeing helper constructs that make certain operations when dealing with lists easier but at that time I could not understand themCan you understand them now ? Study LINQ !
«The mind is not a vessel to be filled but a fire to be kindled» Plutarch
Bill your post seems to have some formatting problems
