What does .NET mean for you?
-
'...Clearly English is not your first language, or you would have understood me, and understood that asking me if I understand design better than a monkey is more than a little insulting......' I've clearly touched some hurting point of you... ooopppsss '...you obviously have not SEEN .Net ) and 'simpler stuff to design' ( i.e. remove powerful stuff like pointers, on the basis that they are 'too hard'...' YES, I did clearly touched it, oooppsss C++ is still there in the .NET and you can continue to use it if you like it. Do you understand my poor English now ? '...It becomes easier and easier for people to be bad programmers and come out with something that works, sort of. I don't doubt that good progammers will write good code in C#, I think though that it will be a continuation of what VB has given us - a million websites showing off a million poorly written programs...' Well, I don't personally use VB but one thing is sure : it's the most popular language on the earth and if you don't like 'a million websites showing off a million poorly written programs' you can simply stay away from them so you won't be scared anymore ;P
'...Clearly English is not your first language, or you would have understood me, and understood that asking me if I understand design better than a monkey is more than a little insulting......' I've clearly touched some hurting point of you... ooopppsss Sorry, you expected to be offensive and get no reaction ? '...you obviously have not SEEN .Net ) and 'simpler stuff to design' ( i.e. remove powerful stuff like pointers, on the basis that they are 'too hard'...' YES, I did clearly touched it, oooppsss I don't know what you mean. a/ .Net is NOT a simpler IDE, it MAY prove to be more productive but it is very cluttered and ugly to someone used to VC rather than VB. b/ Microsoft s OFFICIAL blurb is that C# is as easy as VB and as powerful as C++ with stuff like pointers romoved and stuff like garbage collection put in to make it easier. C++ is still there in the .NET and you can continue to use it if you like it. Do you understand my poor English now ? Yeah, yeah - I can use it, I can even mix it was Cb, but it still comes down to the CLR, the extra layer between me and the processor. '...It becomes easier and easier for people to be bad programmers and come out with something that works, sort of. I don't doubt that good progammers will write good code in C#, I think though that it will be a continuation of what VB has given us - a million websites showing off a million poorly written programs...' Well, I don't personally use VB but one thing is sure : it's the most popular language on the earth and if you don't like 'a million websites showing off a million poorly written programs' you can simply stay away from them so you won't be scared anymore ;P I guess you still don't understand me, or you are being obtuse. I'm concerned that M$ is endorsing people getting easy to use tools that do not emphasise skill, I am not scared that this is already the case, I just don't go there, as you say. This is the real test of VB - not how many programs ARE there, but how many do you USE ? Same will be true of .Net. Christian The content of this post is not necessarily the opinion of my yadda yadda yadda. To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
-
'...Clearly English is not your first language, or you would have understood me, and understood that asking me if I understand design better than a monkey is more than a little insulting......' I've clearly touched some hurting point of you... ooopppsss Sorry, you expected to be offensive and get no reaction ? '...you obviously have not SEEN .Net ) and 'simpler stuff to design' ( i.e. remove powerful stuff like pointers, on the basis that they are 'too hard'...' YES, I did clearly touched it, oooppsss I don't know what you mean. a/ .Net is NOT a simpler IDE, it MAY prove to be more productive but it is very cluttered and ugly to someone used to VC rather than VB. b/ Microsoft s OFFICIAL blurb is that C# is as easy as VB and as powerful as C++ with stuff like pointers romoved and stuff like garbage collection put in to make it easier. C++ is still there in the .NET and you can continue to use it if you like it. Do you understand my poor English now ? Yeah, yeah - I can use it, I can even mix it was Cb, but it still comes down to the CLR, the extra layer between me and the processor. '...It becomes easier and easier for people to be bad programmers and come out with something that works, sort of. I don't doubt that good progammers will write good code in C#, I think though that it will be a continuation of what VB has given us - a million websites showing off a million poorly written programs...' Well, I don't personally use VB but one thing is sure : it's the most popular language on the earth and if you don't like 'a million websites showing off a million poorly written programs' you can simply stay away from them so you won't be scared anymore ;P I guess you still don't understand me, or you are being obtuse. I'm concerned that M$ is endorsing people getting easy to use tools that do not emphasise skill, I am not scared that this is already the case, I just don't go there, as you say. This is the real test of VB - not how many programs ARE there, but how many do you USE ? Same will be true of .Net. Christian The content of this post is not necessarily the opinion of my yadda yadda yadda. To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
'...Sorry, you expected to be offensive and get no reaction ? ...' opppsss, I did it again.... '...Yeah, yeah - I can use it, I can even mix it was Cb, but it still comes down to the CLR, the extra layer between me and the processor. ' Probably you're speaking of something you don't understand very well : CLR will be in the meddle of you and your processor only if you use managed code. Otherwise you can still program in C++ and MFC7. Christian, do you write'...well design code' ? Who's the monkey for bananas that check if you write well design code ? I've read from your signature that you probably don't understand recursion... ;P ;P ;P ;P ;P ;P ;P smile please
-
'...Clearly English is not your first language, or you would have understood me, and understood that asking me if I understand design better than a monkey is more than a little insulting......' I've clearly touched some hurting point of you... ooopppsss Sorry, you expected to be offensive and get no reaction ? '...you obviously have not SEEN .Net ) and 'simpler stuff to design' ( i.e. remove powerful stuff like pointers, on the basis that they are 'too hard'...' YES, I did clearly touched it, oooppsss I don't know what you mean. a/ .Net is NOT a simpler IDE, it MAY prove to be more productive but it is very cluttered and ugly to someone used to VC rather than VB. b/ Microsoft s OFFICIAL blurb is that C# is as easy as VB and as powerful as C++ with stuff like pointers romoved and stuff like garbage collection put in to make it easier. C++ is still there in the .NET and you can continue to use it if you like it. Do you understand my poor English now ? Yeah, yeah - I can use it, I can even mix it was Cb, but it still comes down to the CLR, the extra layer between me and the processor. '...It becomes easier and easier for people to be bad programmers and come out with something that works, sort of. I don't doubt that good progammers will write good code in C#, I think though that it will be a continuation of what VB has given us - a million websites showing off a million poorly written programs...' Well, I don't personally use VB but one thing is sure : it's the most popular language on the earth and if you don't like 'a million websites showing off a million poorly written programs' you can simply stay away from them so you won't be scared anymore ;P I guess you still don't understand me, or you are being obtuse. I'm concerned that M$ is endorsing people getting easy to use tools that do not emphasise skill, I am not scared that this is already the case, I just don't go there, as you say. This is the real test of VB - not how many programs ARE there, but how many do you USE ? Same will be true of .Net. Christian The content of this post is not necessarily the opinion of my yadda yadda yadda. To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
>>a/ .Net is NOT a simpler IDE, it MAY prove to be more productive but it is very> cluttered and ugly to someone used to VC rather than VB.<< I don't understand why all you VC guys think the IDE is like the VB IDE. It's not. I've been programming in VB for quite a while now and the IDE has changed quite a bit. I also use Visual InterDev extensively and I have to say that the IDE is InterDev with nicer looking menus. And the InterDev IDE looks quite similar to the VC IDE which I also use quite often. Personally, I hate the VB IDE and love the InterDev and VC IDE's and I welcome the change in VS.NET. >>Yeah, yeah - I can use it, I can even mix it was Cb, but it still comes down to the CLR, the extra layer between me and the processor<< I don't understand the "mix it was Cb" statement. Do you mean "mix it with C#?" Anyway, C++ can still be compiled to native code without requiring the CLR, just like it's always been. It's the only language in the .NET world that can. However, if you do mix it with C#, VB.NET, COBOL.NET ;P , or any other .NET language, then you will be using C++ with Managed Extensions (MC++) and the CLR will come into play. Jason Gerard MCSD, MCSE Solutions Developer Technology Point International, Inc.
-
Apart from hype, apart from tons of goodies, .NET seems to be paving the way for a commercial implementation of IP (Intentional Programming). Don't mistake me, I believe that .NET is great and does make sense economically, but the long-awaited breakthrough in software development will come from something like IP.
-
Hey all, There seems to be the perception that MS is pushing .NET down our throats and that we better get with the program or, or...well, "or else". So what exactly is it about the new IDE, the new and updated versions of MFC and ATL, C#, ADO.NET etc that interests/annoys/excites or bores you? To me, it's a better platform for Code Project. No more VBScript, no more hassles with COM components, a faster site and a more manageable codebase. It's also a better IDE (a HUGE improvement IMHO); a new language that fills the void after the Sun vs MS hassles; improved ATL and MFC and a compiler that picks up more errors and tells you about them in a way that now makes sense. There is also another distributable run-time. It's certainly not going to fit on a 1.44 floppy, and what happens when v1.01, v1.2, v2.0...come out? There is the concern that there may not be a huge take-up of client side .NET, the confusion with implementing the security model in your apps. So I want to know what your thoughts on .NET (the whole thing, not just C#) are. For those who don't like it, can you tell us what it is you don't like, and for those with good experiences, please share them! cheers, Chris Maunder
The reason I'm not interested in .NET is that it is simply a continuation of Microsoft's previous technology development scheme: 1) Envision a new technology that will solve all the problems of the old 2) Work a small team of engineers to death proving the concept 3) Announce this new technology that will change the world 4) Work a large team of engineers to death meeting the deadlines 5) Release the technology before it is ready 6) Stand back and let the world deal with the confusing, incomplete, and buggy results of this process 7) Repeat as necessary. Your comments are pretty telling in this regard: "No more VBScript". Wasn't VBScript supposed to bring programming to the masses? Instead, all it did was unleash viruses on the world. "no more hassles with COM components" COM componments were supposed to allow us to build applications by "simply" connecting components. Uh-huh. "what happens when v1.01, v1.2, v2.0...come out?" Indeed. Versionitis is the NUMBER 1 problem with Windows - it's the cause of much of the instability and "system rot" that plagues Windows and, more importantly, we the users. MS has never solved the problems caused by their reliance on interchangable system components - they've just caused the problems to resurface wearing different guises. You observation "what happens when v1.01, v1.2, v2.0...come out?" is telling. Versionitis is the number 1 problem in the Windows world
-
Hey all, There seems to be the perception that MS is pushing .NET down our throats and that we better get with the program or, or...well, "or else". So what exactly is it about the new IDE, the new and updated versions of MFC and ATL, C#, ADO.NET etc that interests/annoys/excites or bores you? To me, it's a better platform for Code Project. No more VBScript, no more hassles with COM components, a faster site and a more manageable codebase. It's also a better IDE (a HUGE improvement IMHO); a new language that fills the void after the Sun vs MS hassles; improved ATL and MFC and a compiler that picks up more errors and tells you about them in a way that now makes sense. There is also another distributable run-time. It's certainly not going to fit on a 1.44 floppy, and what happens when v1.01, v1.2, v2.0...come out? There is the concern that there may not be a huge take-up of client side .NET, the confusion with implementing the security model in your apps. So I want to know what your thoughts on .NET (the whole thing, not just C#) are. For those who don't like it, can you tell us what it is you don't like, and for those with good experiences, please share them! cheers, Chris Maunder
.NET looks good and I'd love to check it out, but my principal current software development project involves moving a Windows application that we have been using internally into a commercial product. Our market research shows that the potential customers for this product (agricultural and pharmaceutical industries) are 99%+ Linux (The Human Genome issue of Science magazine offers the career advice that Linux expertise is a non-negotiable requirement for the bioinformatics industry), so I can't afford to look at .NET until I can evaluate the Linux version.
-
'...Sorry, you expected to be offensive and get no reaction ? ...' opppsss, I did it again.... '...Yeah, yeah - I can use it, I can even mix it was Cb, but it still comes down to the CLR, the extra layer between me and the processor. ' Probably you're speaking of something you don't understand very well : CLR will be in the meddle of you and your processor only if you use managed code. Otherwise you can still program in C++ and MFC7. Christian, do you write'...well design code' ? Who's the monkey for bananas that check if you write well design code ? I've read from your signature that you probably don't understand recursion... ;P ;P ;P ;P ;P ;P ;P smile please
-
There seems to be the perception that MS is pushing .NET down our throats and that we better get with the program or, or...well, "or else". You mean this isn't the case? ;) But seriously, I personally don't see myself diving head-first into .NET for two big reasons:
- I have little interest in writing Internet- or web-based apps.
- I have even less interest in learning yet another class library.
#1 is just my preference, but #2 might be a stumbling block for many people. I started with the SDK, then learned tons about MFC. It took me a long time to do anything serious with ATL because it worked totally differently from MFC, and I felt I would be better served continuing on with what I knew rather than go through the haze and learning curve of ATL. As for the IDE... well, I bet many of you know that I'm a "grumpy old man" when it comes to UI. I ain't changing now. :) My feelings would best be described as: :eek: The VC 6 IDE + WndTabs is perfect IMNSHO. VS.NET looks and feels clunky with those weird docking/hiding windows. And the menus and toolbars... ugh, could MS have made them any uglier? They look totally washed out and it's hard to find the buttons I need. (Do Whistler and Office XP look the same?) The big selling point of .NET is ease of writing new apps. While that's an admirable goal, I agree with another comment posted earlier that it may be hiding too much and keeping the programmer too much in the dark. I've been trying to make an argument to back up this opinion for about 10 minutes now, but I can never make it sound good. So I'll just leave it at that as MHO. --Mike-- http://home.inreach.com/mdunn/ The preferred snack of 4 out of 5 Lounge readers.
About the last thing you were going to comment on, but didn't. I agree with another comment posted earlier that it may be hiding too much and keeping the programmer too much in the dark. Would it be something along the lines of. "RAD" tools and philosophies, and other techniques to take the "pain" out of programming only serve to dumb-down the programmer. This is not a good thing. Supplying a wizard so a tyro can knock up a GUI-based wordprocessor app in 5 minutes leads to a false sense of achievement and security. (Now spend the next 6 months battling the class-library infrastructure to get the thing working how you want it). (Caution, mini-rant approaching) ....but it's not all Microsoft's or even the .NET-type programmers' fault, I've seen managers drool when presented with flashy GUI's. I've seen people promoted on the strength of a cardboard GUI with nothing behind it. (Rant ends). In my opinion (not humble, or otherwise), .NET == programming with nappies. And on a professional note, the company I contract for are moving away from Microsoft, so we're looking initially at Linux cross-platform code. Which means no .NET. Anyone know if Microsoft are now "deprecating" (love that word!) "old" COM? I'm interested purely because if we use COM under Linux, then we're flogging a compatibility dead-horse. Ho hum, back to using sockets for IPC.....
-
Hey all, There seems to be the perception that MS is pushing .NET down our throats and that we better get with the program or, or...well, "or else". So what exactly is it about the new IDE, the new and updated versions of MFC and ATL, C#, ADO.NET etc that interests/annoys/excites or bores you? To me, it's a better platform for Code Project. No more VBScript, no more hassles with COM components, a faster site and a more manageable codebase. It's also a better IDE (a HUGE improvement IMHO); a new language that fills the void after the Sun vs MS hassles; improved ATL and MFC and a compiler that picks up more errors and tells you about them in a way that now makes sense. There is also another distributable run-time. It's certainly not going to fit on a 1.44 floppy, and what happens when v1.01, v1.2, v2.0...come out? There is the concern that there may not be a huge take-up of client side .NET, the confusion with implementing the security model in your apps. So I want to know what your thoughts on .NET (the whole thing, not just C#) are. For those who don't like it, can you tell us what it is you don't like, and for those with good experiences, please share them! cheers, Chris Maunder
I really look forward to the new version of ATL with attributes. It looks to simplify everyday C++ COM programming a lot and eliminate so much of the proliferating mixins, COM_MAPs, etc. BTW, if .NET wasn't being forced down our throats, wouldn't all the new class libraries be available from unmanaged code?
-
The reason I'm not interested in .NET is that it is simply a continuation of Microsoft's previous technology development scheme: 1) Envision a new technology that will solve all the problems of the old 2) Work a small team of engineers to death proving the concept 3) Announce this new technology that will change the world 4) Work a large team of engineers to death meeting the deadlines 5) Release the technology before it is ready 6) Stand back and let the world deal with the confusing, incomplete, and buggy results of this process 7) Repeat as necessary. Your comments are pretty telling in this regard: "No more VBScript". Wasn't VBScript supposed to bring programming to the masses? Instead, all it did was unleash viruses on the world. "no more hassles with COM components" COM componments were supposed to allow us to build applications by "simply" connecting components. Uh-huh. "what happens when v1.01, v1.2, v2.0...come out?" Indeed. Versionitis is the NUMBER 1 problem with Windows - it's the cause of much of the instability and "system rot" that plagues Windows and, more importantly, we the users. MS has never solved the problems caused by their reliance on interchangable system components - they've just caused the problems to resurface wearing different guises. You observation "what happens when v1.01, v1.2, v2.0...come out?" is telling. Versionitis is the number 1 problem in the Windows world
I have to agree with the end result, but maybe the original intentions were good. Unfortunately there is a great gulf between what Microsoft say they will deliver, and what actually ships. But as long as they have customers, this won't change. I did like what you said about Microsoft first creating a problem, then offering a solution. Look at NT, start off with a clean architecture, then bloat it to death later. I mean, they even boast about the amount of lines of code in their products as if more is better. I'm going now, before I get flambeed.
-
>>a/ .Net is NOT a simpler IDE, it MAY prove to be more productive but it is very> cluttered and ugly to someone used to VC rather than VB.<< I don't understand why all you VC guys think the IDE is like the VB IDE. It's not. I've been programming in VB for quite a while now and the IDE has changed quite a bit. I also use Visual InterDev extensively and I have to say that the IDE is InterDev with nicer looking menus. And the InterDev IDE looks quite similar to the VC IDE which I also use quite often. Personally, I hate the VB IDE and love the InterDev and VC IDE's and I welcome the change in VS.NET. >>Yeah, yeah - I can use it, I can even mix it was Cb, but it still comes down to the CLR, the extra layer between me and the processor<< I don't understand the "mix it was Cb" statement. Do you mean "mix it with C#?" Anyway, C++ can still be compiled to native code without requiring the CLR, just like it's always been. It's the only language in the .NET world that can. However, if you do mix it with C#, VB.NET, COBOL.NET ;P , or any other .NET language, then you will be using C++ with Managed Extensions (MC++) and the CLR will come into play. Jason Gerard MCSD, MCSE Solutions Developer Technology Point International, Inc.
C# == C Sharp Cb == C Flat Anyway... C# is easier to learn therefore more people will be able to use it. By making the language trivial, the people that use it will consider it trivial. They will take one or two classes to learn the language then feel their education is done. However, knowing a language does not mean you know the principles. I was programming in C++ for four years before I even heard of a design pattern. It was not something that was taught in my classes. The only reason is discovered it was because I am dedicated to improving my skills, as are most of the other people that visit this site. I think many C++ programmers feel threatened my the possibility that all the time they invested into learning their trade will be trumped by the utter simplicity of C#. I would be more concerned about becoming a baby sitter.
-
>>a/ .Net is NOT a simpler IDE, it MAY prove to be more productive but it is very> cluttered and ugly to someone used to VC rather than VB.<< I don't understand why all you VC guys think the IDE is like the VB IDE. It's not. I've been programming in VB for quite a while now and the IDE has changed quite a bit. I also use Visual InterDev extensively and I have to say that the IDE is InterDev with nicer looking menus. And the InterDev IDE looks quite similar to the VC IDE which I also use quite often. Personally, I hate the VB IDE and love the InterDev and VC IDE's and I welcome the change in VS.NET. >>Yeah, yeah - I can use it, I can even mix it was Cb, but it still comes down to the CLR, the extra layer between me and the processor<< I don't understand the "mix it was Cb" statement. Do you mean "mix it with C#?" Anyway, C++ can still be compiled to native code without requiring the CLR, just like it's always been. It's the only language in the .NET world that can. However, if you do mix it with C#, VB.NET, COBOL.NET ;P , or any other .NET language, then you will be using C++ with Managed Extensions (MC++) and the CLR will come into play. Jason Gerard MCSD, MCSE Solutions Developer Technology Point International, Inc.
I guess the main thing that struck me as VB like was the sudden invasion of property sheets to show properties of dialog items VB style, with a list of properties and a drop down next to each. I confess to minial VB experience, so my impression may be more to do with the total changes to the IDE bearing a similarity to superficial elements of my limited VB experience. I know I can compile native C++ in VC 7, the thing is that I don't know ( I guess because it's not being pushed ) of any reason to move to VC 7, the changes to MFC seem minimal from what I have heard. Oh, I realised I was probably going to go over peoples heads - I play guitar and the opposite of a note being sharp, is a note being flat. There ISN'T a C flat ( it is B ), but if there were, the notation would be Cb, at least on a PC ( it's not exactly a 'b', but it looks a lot like one ). Christian The content of this post is not necessarily the opinion of my yadda yadda yadda. To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
-
C# == C Sharp Cb == C Flat Anyway... C# is easier to learn therefore more people will be able to use it. By making the language trivial, the people that use it will consider it trivial. They will take one or two classes to learn the language then feel their education is done. However, knowing a language does not mean you know the principles. I was programming in C++ for four years before I even heard of a design pattern. It was not something that was taught in my classes. The only reason is discovered it was because I am dedicated to improving my skills, as are most of the other people that visit this site. I think many C++ programmers feel threatened my the possibility that all the time they invested into learning their trade will be trumped by the utter simplicity of C#. I would be more concerned about becoming a baby sitter.
I'm glad someone got it. You have succinctly stated what I am trying to say - I am concerned that I will find myself spending a fair portion of my working life babysitting people who did two classes in C# and so think because the code compiles, it is good. Christian The content of this post is not necessarily the opinion of my yadda yadda yadda. To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
-
'...Sorry, you expected to be offensive and get no reaction ? ...' opppsss, I did it again.... '...Yeah, yeah - I can use it, I can even mix it was Cb, but it still comes down to the CLR, the extra layer between me and the processor. ' Probably you're speaking of something you don't understand very well : CLR will be in the meddle of you and your processor only if you use managed code. Otherwise you can still program in C++ and MFC7. Christian, do you write'...well design code' ? Who's the monkey for bananas that check if you write well design code ? I've read from your signature that you probably don't understand recursion... ;P ;P ;P ;P ;P ;P ;P smile please
Yes, Britny, I guess you did :) I *know* I can avoid the CLR 'meddling' with my code, the point is then why buy .Net ? I'm discussing the aspects of .Net that are being pushed, if there is a reason for me to buy the product, they are keeping it a secret. Direct compiled code seems to be something they *have* to do, not part of the overall vision/ You know, I have a good sense of humour ( so they tell me ), but for the sake of this discussion, you'd be better to give up. No matter how often you insult my ability to write good code ( on the basis I don't like the idea of C#, given that is all you know about it ), or how many smileys you use, the basic premise is not funny coming from a total stranger. Would you like to start a discussion on what constitutes 'well designed code' ? I'd be happy to participate, and happy to hear any criticisms of my ideas based on the fact that I have presented them. I don't mind being criticised, in fact I like the opportunity to learn a better way. But harping on like this for the sake of a joke simply isn't funny, and you should cut your losses. Christian The content of this post is not necessarily the opinion of my yadda yadda yadda. To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
-
I guess the main thing that struck me as VB like was the sudden invasion of property sheets to show properties of dialog items VB style, with a list of properties and a drop down next to each. I confess to minial VB experience, so my impression may be more to do with the total changes to the IDE bearing a similarity to superficial elements of my limited VB experience. I know I can compile native C++ in VC 7, the thing is that I don't know ( I guess because it's not being pushed ) of any reason to move to VC 7, the changes to MFC seem minimal from what I have heard. Oh, I realised I was probably going to go over peoples heads - I play guitar and the opposite of a note being sharp, is a note being flat. There ISN'T a C flat ( it is B ), but if there were, the notation would be Cb, at least on a PC ( it's not exactly a 'b', but it looks a lot like one ). Christian The content of this post is not necessarily the opinion of my yadda yadda yadda. To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion.
Christian - I was just like you once (and this is not a bad thing): I developed all my code in pure C and then in C++. I even wrote lots of low level graphics (all 2D) routines in C and assembly as you have mentioned doing. I hated VB. And I avoided COM/ActiveX and especially Java. I learned everything C++ on Windows: MFC, ATL, Platform SDK, etc. But then slowly my application needed to interact with other apps and so I picked up COM and ActiveX -- which I found to be quite elegant when done right - which meant a good design and a C++ implementation. Problem was testing that stuff. Turned out that VB was a great tool for testing my code. What took me hours to hand craft in ATL could be rigged for testing in VB in minutes. I made the discovery that for me, VB was simply a tool I could use to make my life easier. Maybe for some applications (not my pedal to the metal graphics app!) you could do some simple stuff in VB -- like maybe encoding business logic or something -- but I no longer saw VB as a toy. Like any tool that makes a job easier, programming languages that simplify tasks, and technologies that hide more complex technologies, can be dangerous when not fully comprehended by the people who wield them. This is, I think, a piece of your point of view here in the lounge over the last couple days. Fortunately, I KNOW I have the skills that places me in a higher category of devs and I KNOW I can always make good money in this industry because I can prove my worth. You probably fall in the same category. My point is this: .NET may not seem to apply directly to the applications we're used to building. But our applications have changing requirements (mine did and continues to have) and the trend is certainly to Internet-enable them. And I cannot believe that Microsoft is promoting a new platform that will not have a role for the "master-programmer". There is confusion I think in simplicity vs. total-cost-of-ownership (development?). Marketing types will always focus on TCO by pointing out simplicity, which is a lot of what I've seen with .NET. Developers need to be able to see beyond this and understand the technology and preserve their positioning in the proficiency hierarchy. This I'm not scared of. (Personally I'd be bored stiff if I had to write pure C++/MFC/ATL for the rest of my career). So I'm not afraid to have another tool in my belt. I may not be focussing on Internet applications right now, but I have places in my code that would benefit from some of the cool .net and C#
-
Hey all, There seems to be the perception that MS is pushing .NET down our throats and that we better get with the program or, or...well, "or else". So what exactly is it about the new IDE, the new and updated versions of MFC and ATL, C#, ADO.NET etc that interests/annoys/excites or bores you? To me, it's a better platform for Code Project. No more VBScript, no more hassles with COM components, a faster site and a more manageable codebase. It's also a better IDE (a HUGE improvement IMHO); a new language that fills the void after the Sun vs MS hassles; improved ATL and MFC and a compiler that picks up more errors and tells you about them in a way that now makes sense. There is also another distributable run-time. It's certainly not going to fit on a 1.44 floppy, and what happens when v1.01, v1.2, v2.0...come out? There is the concern that there may not be a huge take-up of client side .NET, the confusion with implementing the security model in your apps. So I want to know what your thoughts on .NET (the whole thing, not just C#) are. For those who don't like it, can you tell us what it is you don't like, and for those with good experiences, please share them! cheers, Chris Maunder
(Taking off my *official mouthpiece* hat...) I think one of the biggest .NET benefits that gets overlooked is consistency of API and programming model. In the past, APIs got targetted towards different languages. An API that needed to be used by VB was typically written as a COM object using automation types. Easy to use from VB, often a pain to do from C++ (ie SafeArray). Other APIs got targetted towards C++ programmers (Exchange server, for example), and are at best very difficult to use in VB. If you want to write in another language (Perl, for example), you have similar problems. Even if the API you wanted was targetted towards your language, you still had to figure out the mindset of the team that authored the API, figure out what data types they deal with, how they deal with error cases, etc. In the .NET world, there's one way of doing these things, and that simplification is very powerful. Even if you aren't familiar with what a set of classes do, you can understand them fairly easily because they do things in the "standard way", and use standard datatypes.