|
Hello, I have a question. Can I design programs with a graphical interface in C#, Dot Net Core technology, and these programs work on the DOS operating system, such as Norton Ghost Bragg? Thank you.
|
|
|
|
|
No. DOS does not support .NET, C#, or have a GUI!
"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!
|
|
|
|
|
Unless you could port this project[^] to work on it. 
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
I can't be the only one that is curious to know what "Norton Ghost Bragg" is?
|
|
|
|
|
No, you are not.
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
"I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
|
|
|
|
|
I suspect he means "Norton Ghost[^] Backup" a DOS based app that later moved a Windows front end that created bootable DOS images to do the actual work, apparently.
It finally died from terminal apathy on the market side in 2013. A stake was driven through the source code and it was ritually be-header filed.
We shall not see it's like again. Hopefully.
"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!
|
|
|
|
|
So they just want to run that automatically?
It has a UI, at least usage examples I saw show that. Which means one can write a C# app to feed UI events to it.
|
|
|
|
|
No, I think he wants to run actual C#, GUI apps under DOS ... Ghost was an abortion of a "conversion" which just provided a Windows front end that generated a bootable DOS floppy to do the backup - Windows was not involved at all by that stage!
"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!
|
|
|
|
|
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#?
|
|
|
|
|
I doubt that learning C# can help with learning C++.
|
|
|
|
|
With c# you learn about the type of problems a programmer has to deal with and an easy and friendly way to solve them. I had been alternating from one language to the other since I started programming, this is how I got better at c++.
At the end of the day why I want to improve my c# skills doesn’t matter
|
|
|
|
|
If you want to improve your C# skills then randomly asking "what should I learn next" isn't the best way: there is just too much stuff in there.
At it's heart, C# is a pretty simple language, but it's tightly integrated with the .NET framework which is frankly enormous. While variables and classes are part of C#, Lists and such like aren't - they are part of the framework. And while C# and C++ look pretty similar they really aren't, they are very different languages, which can use the same framework but don't have to - C++ doesn't need to use .NET at all!
So "learning C# to get better at C++" isn't really a brilliant idea because you are learning stuff that isn't relevant and may not be transferable.
It may be easier to learn how to think like a developer in C# because it's a lot more forgiving and the .NET framework adds a hugely rich set of support classes but learning specific features isn't the way to do it as they are probably not transferable to "vanilla" C++
What I'd suggest is this: if you want to learn a language then go on a course, or get a book and learn that language. Don't try to learn "X" in the hope it'll make "Y" work as well because it won't - like learning to fly a drone won't teach you to fly a helicopter!
That applies to C# and C++.
"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!
|
|
|
|
|
I understand, C# is not just a beginners language it’s a language used for serious things.
I’m looking to learn the features with a general purpose scope
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: easier to learn how to think like a developer in C#
Which is the main issue as I see it. C# is easier than C/C++, which is a major strength. But learning it leaves a developer unprepared for C/C++ being hard. By which I mean that garbage collecting and such -- memory allocation and cleanup , references , etc. -- may be best learned in C/C++ before C#, as we oldsters did.
I don't recommend C/C++ to any new developer unless they really need to learn it for some particular task.
Basically I skipped C++ anyway and went from C to C# with barely a look back.
|
|
|
|
|
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 ...
"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.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
