I don't like the appearance of Windows 10 either. Windows 7 was freaking beautiful. I get the idea of trying to make apps that work the same on different devices, but apps cannot look the same on different devices. On a computer screen, we want it to look good. You can do really fancy stuff. You can make UI's look fabulous and do pretty much all you want. But phones have limited screen space, so we throw all that overboard. The app just has to fit on the screen. I always say: my PC is not a phone. Stop trying to turn it into one.

So apparently: UWP = evil WPF = half-baked and too steep of a learning curve. WinForms = too old and obsolete Now what?

How many of those are running Windows 10 by choice?

The language is that of JScript, which I will not utter here!

Yup, the update is total crap. I didn't even tell it to update; Windows 10 was just there. It's like it was thinking "oh, your computer is idle? Let me upgrade it for you..." My computer still boots, but it has a ton of problems. Bad move, MS.

Note that this only works if T has an explicit implementation of ICloneable. Otherwise, Clone() will call the instance method and not the extension method. And you don't need the cast to ICloneable.

return (T)obj.Clone();

will do.

Also: "There are no plans right now for emulators or Roslyn analysers." And more stuff for which "there are no plans right now"

I got a popup asking me if I wanted to update now or later. I chose later. It installed anyway. Now my system is all messed up. I've got no start menu, no way to get to Settings and rollback to Windows 7. Many things (even task manager) don't work. I either get an error or nothing happens at all. Thanx a lot Microsoft!

Using escape characters is also fun:

public const double \u0050\u0049 = 3.14;
public const double PI = 3.14; //error CS0102: The type `Test' already contains a definition for `PI'

* Static initializers - I can't imagine using it for Console.WriteLine or something (we always type cw{Tab} anyway, right?) And there's a problem that some methods don't have an intuitive name without the class name, like Tuple.Create. But I like that I can now import extension methods from classes instead of namespaces. * Auto property initializers - Very neat. Should have been there from the beginning. * Dictionary initializers - I guess it's a more intuitive way of writing this particular code but was it absolutely necessary? No. Now we just have 2 slightly different ways of writing the same thing. * String interpolation - I agree it doesn't look pretty, but the old way ({0},{1},{2},etc) didn't look pretty either. * nameof() - Very small feature, but it makes sense to use it everywhere you can. * Expression-bodied members - I think this is a confusing feature. It doesn't even save that much typing. Methods don't look like methods anymore and properties no longer have a 'get' keyword. * Exception filters - Should be useful on rare occasions, but will be abused more often. * Await in catch/finally - Without it, async/await is an incomplete feature, so it should be there, but I don't expect to use it much. * Null conditional - This takes away a lot of ugly, boring, annoying code. Very nice. But it will make C# more cryptic for novice programmers.

I can´t imagine using it for Console.WriteLine or something, but I think importing extension methods from a class instead of a namespace makes much more sense. Like: using static System.Linq.Enumerable;

Or DateTime:

DateTime foo { get { return DateTime.Now; } }

:-D

It's not exactly new to Windows 10. That feature was present at least since Vista. I'm not sure if XP had it.

Someone else told me the same answer once. He made a mistake in his calculation. I guess you did too.

Here's another question: Cheryl is 21 years older than her son. 6 years from now, she will be 5 times as old as him. Question: where is the son's father? ;)

Consider generic types with the same name, like Tuple. You could put

Tuple, Tuple, Tuple

, etc in separate files (Tuple.cs, Tuple`1.cs, Tuple`2.cs), but it's acceptible to put them in one file.

Or, if you can't see the bottom of the glass, you just have to empty the glass somehow.:cool:

I thought it meant you have to make sure you can see the bottom of the glass.

The article was mostly blah blah blah to me, but 2 words from the last sentence describe what I think of Java: ugly & counterproductive. Like for many people, Java was the first language I learned when I really started programming. Later, I learned some other languages and discovered that Java is just a dumb language. I can't say I hate it, but it's just ugly and messy. It's never neat or beautiful (like C#)

I have the exact same experience with GWT. No matter what third-party library you use, at some point it will be deprecated. I never understood why we're using that stuff in the first place. (I'm a C#/.NET junkie) Recently, we tried to switch to Vaadin. (Sort of GWT with a shell) When installing it, we followed every step laid out on the website, then I create a new project: errors! Red squigglies all over the place. Just by creating a new project! Never mind that stuff. Java and everything associated with it is dead to me. C#/.NET/Visual Studio all the way! The phrase 'It just works' is so true.