I sincerely wish you all the best. I just think you're still wrong about VB.

And? I'll bet you'd be extremely disruptive at planning meetings. You can have it your way if you want. I just wouldn't have you in my company. And, you say it competes with SQL, meaning 'it attempts to go after the same market.' Which is well and good, but that doesn't mean anything, because I haven't heard of it, and probably most other people who use SQL haven't either. I wrote a database server, and query language for it too, and sold it commercially. That doesn't make me any more of an expert than someone who hasn't. Nor does it make you. It just means you know what an index is, the appropriate data structures for using it, etc. Congratulations. You're still wrong ;)

Great. Hopefully the people you're hiring for your companies are on the same page with you. Personally, I disagree, and wouldn't hire someone who agreed with you on this particular subject because it likely means they think a lot of other things that I don't agree with. Have a nice day.

Let's get one thing straight, I'm the guy that does the hiring these days. I wouldn't hire you -- someone who so vehemently defends unmaintainable crap and touts it as a feature.

Really? You have accurate data comparing those using 'with blocks' to those without? Those with C experience to those without? Those who know what a stack frame is compared to those who barely understand what a stack data structure is? Calls inside a 'with block' can either be accessing properties or local variables and it isn't immediately obvious which it is. You have to look up the page to see. Also, you're suppressing exceptions, which, if you're talking about cost of development, means your debugging cycle is a lot more intense because it doesn't blow up when something goes wrong.

You sir, win the internet.

You're right.

I think you'll be fine once they turn the forum ratings back on.

I wouldn't call it a complete fail... but having to scroll for the news pretty much sucks

I pasted some XML from my XSL stylesheet into the editor wizard in html mode. It asked me if I wanted to html encode it, I clicked yes and it looked good. But it was large and I didn't notice that it had converted some of the references from "/_layouts/Somefolder/somefile.gif" to "http://www.codeproject/\_layouts/Somefolder/somefile.gif" I'm pretty sure it's a bug because I myself would have never prepended a sharepoint relative url with a codeproject domain name. I fixed it after the fact and it is ok in the revision (as of this writing not yet approved) so I'm pretty sure it happened during the paste-conversion. ;) It was on this article Zen and the art of XSLT rendering fields (SharePoint 2010)[^] EDIT: any update on this?

what is the sound of one hand clapping?

Absolutely agree. I 'var' like a champ and my life is easier for it. The only thing that annoys me is when I run into legacy API's that return non-generic IEnumerable and you can't use it in the foreach loops! It almost makes me want to convert them to a for loop just for spite. Ok, not really on that last part.

I see what you mean now about the redirect now. I have used MVC on many projects since 1.0 but they've all been either windows auth or no-auth so I hadn't noticed. (I know that's a red flag right there, someone just said 'enterprise.' After having my arse handed to me above I think I might deserve it.)

AspDotNetDev wrote:

So then, what haven't I figured out that you have?

That was not directed to you. I know I shouldn't mash it in with a reply to you. I generally regard you as a very intelligent person and I respect your posts. Sometimes I get carried away. (But you did too in the OP title. :P)

True. And I always relish the opportunity to find someone who considers me personally interesting or sufficiently savvy to drop the script. But it's a rare thing because to the guy on the other end of the line, you're a customer and he's just working. Think about it. But it is disconcerting when you think you're getting respect and you're really just getting well branded customer service. The fact that the OP was disappointed to find out he hadn't broken through and been two steps away from hanging out with the CSR during the next football game speaks to the credit of the company that had the acumen to hire him in the first place to take calls.

Yes! Exactly. And I think that it's 'regular' html and javascript is a benefit not a limitation. Especially when compared with the hidden complexities of asp.net ajax (embedded javascript in resource files, that happens to be minified, in case you decide to get cute with a client side debugger.) It is a different way to think about it. And there's an elephant in the room: really, come on, who re-uses user control code anyway? When is the last time your web user controls were ACTUALLY re-usable? Ok, maybe on different pages in one app, but that's exactly like partial views. I upvote in your general direction, Mr. Dennis.

The url doesn't change. What are you talking about? The thing you MIGHT be passing around through those massive security holes called URL's is the route to the controller actions. GASP! People who are complaining about MVC are probably the same ones who have not really figured out how it works. Personally, the biggest benefit of MVC for me is that I get to work with regular html and javascript. It's not like you have to know two ways of looking at the world anymore: one, the rendered way (what it looks like on the browser) and two the web forms markup way. The C# code just wires up the markup with minimal template like instructions versus an entirely new 'dialect' of xml elements you must memorize. Granted it's not so hard once you get used to web forms to remember these xml thingies, but, the black boxy-ness sometimes is an issue. For example, simple things that are heavily abstracted so that the developer never thinks about it, like control extenders, you may never know just wtf is wrong with your auto-complete extender inside a tab panel under lock and key of an update panel, so when troubleshooting it you start doing things like digging into the embedded resource javascript files (which are kindly minified for performance) from the extenders and want to puke all over yourself. IF you are going to use a lot of ajax I think you're crazy if you don't go with MVC. If you're only using a lot of datagrids and I can why you like webforms better. The webforms grids with entity data sources are easier for quick and dirty deployments. I'm going to hammer this again: People don't pass the name of the view to the client. I have no idea where people get this insane idea. The ViewBag is ONLY alive during the execution of the request. It never makes it to the client, kids. It's not ViewState. That's the dangerous bit, ViewState.

Ambulance Chaser!

what the fsck are you kids on about now? fargin ice holes! Wait, that wasn't carlin, that was johnny dangerously, whose last name is an adverb.

10 to 1 it's flash. (I wouldn't know for sure.)

+1