Pete O'Hanlon wrote:
I bet he does use an IDE. I suspect that he thinks it makes him look cool, macho and hardcore claiming he's not using an IDE of some description. The reality is that it just makes him look like an unproductive prat.
Exactly.
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
jschell wrote:
Not to mention the following.
- You are suggesting that you personally would be at a measurable disadvantage in your approach to the entire craft without it. So for example there is no point now nor in the future that anyone should ever consider hiring you for a position that requires use of a non-windows system.
- You are suggesting that such a disadvantage would be a significance to your total value as a developer. Which can only suggest to me that you don't spend much time on say design/architecture or at least think that you achieve that only via your IDE. It also precludes things like knowledge transfer, documentation, mentoring, etc.
No, I'm saying it is inefficient to code .net in a text editor. The entire point of using VS is to increase productivity. Anyone who uses a text editor over an IDE is at a disadvantage. You can make a program work without using an IDE, it is just more difficult and time consuming.
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
Build scripts is one thing, but coding without an IDE, how can one justify that to a client when you are getting paid by the hour?
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
Nope, we are paying a ton of money. We have spent millions on this application and they guy is getting paid quite a bit per hour to do custom work for us.
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
modified on Saturday, July 30, 2011 11:50 AM
Cool. Thanks for the response.
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
As an IDE I simply use UltraEdit (a decent text editor). Then to compile, we have the Nant build scripts (that call csc) and to run tests, NUnit. To debug, I used to use the ClrDebug and attach to the process. But after installing a new SQL Server sometime last winter it tried to put some lite version of Visual Studio on it and it got rid of that, unfortunately. I'm meeting with this guys next week for a "knowledge transfer" because I will be responsible for maintaining applications written by this person and I just don't get it. Apparently, he doesn't use an IDE to make .net applications.
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
I had fought with this many times my self. Get firefox. Install firefox and firebug. Use the net tab in firebug to see what is going on. Did you check the config file of your wpf application? Are the endpoints correct? Sorry FF may only work with silverlight, not sure about wpf.
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
None. I have never done any unit testing. I test my methods as I code and have actual users do user acceptance testing. We also have a project manager write up a test plan with users. I've never done any unit testing, nor do I plan on it in the near future.
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
Nice reply. If you are looking to build an event calendar, be sure to check this out. http://www.telerik.com/products/aspnet-ajax/scheduler.aspx[]
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
The funny thing about good credit is once you get it, you don't need it. My rating and my wife's have gone up over 750, but we just refinanced into a 15 year deal and already have car loans. We don't plan on ever having another loan since we have enough invested to buy what we need in the future.
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
Abhinav S wrote:
You have to choose what best fits your requirements / skill sets.
This makes sense. I have been doing ASP.Net for almost 10 years, so I can write these applications in my sleep. I have spent a two months learning / working on a silverlight MVVM application. I think the user interface is a lot nicer. My users, have only complained about the silver light updates. Many of them are using older PCs so the install isn't as fast as it should be. Also, I find the MVVM programming rather difficult. All of the data binding "magic" hidden from me as the developer makes wrapping my head around things seem more difficult. I know it takes a little bit more work to set the property of control rather than data binding, but is nice to be able to set a break point and see exactly what is being set... Really, the only reason for me to use something other than ASP.Net 4.0 at this point is to improve my resume.
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
I don't follow the code your coworkers wrote. I understand your code though, it makes perfect sense. If you do any MVVM programming, you have pass not only classes, but delegates (which is even more confusing) to methods in order to do asynchronous programming. Your co worker is all kinds of crazy.
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
I think I'm starting to lose it. I make corporate LOB apps and it is up to me what framework / pattern I want to use. For a good 5 years there it was ASP.Net. Now I can use SilverLight (with or without MVVM), MVC or ASP.Net. And what about data access? I can use ADO.Net, Entity FrameWork, LINQtoSQL, Subsonic, My own POCO classes, Ria Services, WCF Services ect... Just for shits and giggles I did my last project, a web application with about 10 pages and 6 database tables all using my ADO.Net DataAccessLibrary that I wrote 8 years ago and standard ASP.Net. I still got application done in no time, the users were stoked cause I automated a lot of shit for them and it was a huge success. To top it off, the newest browsers are so fast, you can't even tell the difference between a full postback and a AJAX request on my intranet. AJAX is almost becoming irrelevant. Oh and BTW, I have been investing some time in learning MVC 3. WTF, it feels like old school classic ASP. I guess it is cool, if you want to make something like face book. But for LOB apps, it isn't any easier than ASP.net... I'm done ranting...
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
Get a good video card and lots of ram. Any quad core processor will be fine.
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
It is much better than previous versions of IE. It will make life better for people who develop corporate intranet applications. But for personal use there really isn't much point. Chrome still outclasses IE. Also, since Chrome is constantly being updated and they don't have to worry about compatibility issues, I doubt IE will ever catch up.
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
Todd Smith wrote:
Maybe the 9 refers to the number of releases it will take them to catch up to the other browsers? And yes, that number will keep increasing
Yes, pretty funny. The desperately need to make a new version of IE that gets updated regularly to keep up with the competition. They should call it IE Fun or something like that. I guess they have to be very careful with IE not to break any of the thousands of Enterprise applications that run in Corporate offices everywhere but when Google Chrome is about to release Version 11 in 3 years, they need to do something.
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
Chris C-B wrote:
If so, then the guy is a real 'tard. Anybody with half a brain would see an Office sales boost from using the Word/Outlook spell checker in IE if both products were installed.
Any guess why they didn't include the SC in IE?
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
Good to know. Thanks. I have just put my second Silverlight application into production. Yesterday I started learning MVC 3. I have been doing some tutorials. It is much much easier than the MVVM stuff I've been doing. However, the SL projects have some advantages for sure. I'm so torn as to what to use...
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
My guess is that some executive thinks giving away a spell checker will hurt MS Office sales. It seems like Office is the only MS product with a spell checker.
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
Thanks but it didn't work.
I didn't get any requirements for the signature