|
James T. Johnson wrote:
Actually you're quite wrong here. C# 1.0 has been released for almost a month now; Visual C# hasn't yet been released
You know what - release my ass 
James T. Johnson wrote:
I've never seen why you stress the point about it not being released yet
Well, it's because MS and many others are pretending that beta technology is good to create a product already. It's not!
With new technologies is like with discovering the new land - the first pioneers always do something stupid and die. It's the "second wawe" that walking other the pioneer's dead bodies achieves the success - learning from their mistakes... 
|
|
|
|
|
George wrote:
You know what - release my ass
 You let go first! 
George wrote:
the first pioneers always do something stupid and die. It's the "second wawe" that walking other the pioneer's dead bodies achieves the success - learning from their mistakes..
What are you doing then?!?!? You should be pushing those technologies on your competitors! 
In all honesty though, you do have a point.
However not everything dealing with .NET is a risk; the basis of it was COM+ 2.0 so it has/had a firm basis already. Because .NET can interface with COM and the Win32 API via P/Invoke its risk factor is reduced. You can continue to develop the main part of your apps with COM/C and then try .NET out on it to see if it works for you.
Or if you prefer you can write your COM components with .NET for your testing.
Now, most of my work is done server side with a few client apps here and there; I also don't do programming full time so I can make an evaluation of .NET without putting the company I work for at a risk. So far my evaluation has been great with a strong community already out there to help answer picky questions when needed.
Of course, who cares what I think though; only you (or your boss) can decide if .NET works for you; but you absolutely positively cannot make that decision without trying it. Until someone within your company tries it you only rely on what your competitors say, and why should you listen to them?
James
Sonork ID: 100.11138 - Hasaki
"My words but a whisper -- your deafness a SHOUT.
I may make you feel but I can't make you think." - Thick as a Brick, Jethro Tull 1972
|
|
|
|
|
James T. Johnson wrote:
What are you doing then?!?!? You should be pushing those technologies on your competitors!
Hm, maybe I should clarify a bit - we are making an in-house applications, we have no compatitors and the only factor we are battling is time
|
|
|
|
|
Well in that case, good luck and God speed
James
Sonork ID: 100.11138 - Hasaki
"My words but a whisper -- your deafness a SHOUT.
I may make you feel but I can't make you think." - Thick as a Brick, Jethro Tull 1972
|
|
|
|
|
Christian Graus wrote:
Have you bought any books on C# ? Have you used it at all ? If not, then your statements have more to do with technofear than any basis in fact. I may well decide that C# sucks, but I will learn it first, and then decide. I may well decide that .NET is useless for me, but I'll decide based on fact, not hearsay, and ultimately that means trying it for myself.
I have the same attitude. My problem is I have a big fat book on C# (Troelsen's C# and the .NET platform), but so much more is happening in the C++ world regarding templates -- STL, ATL 7, WTL, Loki, Boost, etc. that I find more exciting and interesting. For example, the ability to use policy classes to customize template code offers much more reusability than what is offered with C# or Java. I see the trend in the C++ world shifting to designing quality focused libraries that can be fine-tuned to the task at hand, rather than using a big monolithic class library that takes months to explore and offers only a single take-it-or-leave-it approach.
C++ is still so dynamic that it's where I end up spending most of my time.
CodeGuy
The WTL newsgroup: over 1200 members! Be a part of it. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wtl
|
|
|
|
|
CodeGuy wrote:
My problem is I have a big fat book on C# (Troelsen's C# and the .NET platform),
I chose that book as well, it's pretty damn good IMO.
CodeGuy wrote:
but so much more is happening in the C++ world regarding templates -- STL, ATL 7, WTL, Loki, Boost, etc.
STL is hardly 'happening', it's been here for a while. But I get your drift, and I agree to some extent.
CodeGuy wrote:
For example, the ability to use policy classes to customize template code offers much more reusability than what is offered with C# or Java.
Loki apparently compiles under VC++.NET internally at Microsoft, so I'm looking forward to their releasing the service pack. I bought that book as well on my travels and I agree it is amazing stuff. Of course all .NET languages are getting generics, so who is to say the technique won't work in C# soon enough ?
CodeGuy wrote:
C++ is still so dynamic that it's where I end up spending most of my time.
I tend to put my home time into things I don't get to play with at work. I'll be learning ATL at work in my new job, and using MFC in my other job, so I'll focus my hometime equally between working through 'Modern C++ Desgin' and my C# book, but probably put more coding time into C#, simply because my new work is already using it internally and will use it for release software when the compiler is released.
Christian
I have come to clean zee pooollll. - Michael Martin Dec 30, 2001
Picture the daffodil. And while you do that, I'll be over here going through your stuff.
|
|
|
|
|
>>My problem is I have a big fat book on C# (Troelsen's C# and the .NET platform),
>I chose that book as well, it's pretty damn good IMO.
Oh, I agree -- it's super. I just wish I could get to it! Troelsen is a great writer.
Of course all .NET languages are getting generics, so who is to say the technique won't work in C# soon enough ?
I'd sure be happy if they implemented it, but I wonder if they will drag their feet. I think they might wait until the C++ community hashes out some of the problems and restrictions on templates in the Standard. It could be too much of a moving target, especially since they will have to support all that generic typing in the CLR. (Just thinking out loud; don't mind me.)
CodeGuy
The WTL newsgroup: over 1200 members! Be a part of it. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wtl
|
|
|
|
|
Christian Graus wrote:
Of course all .NET languages are getting generics, so who is to say the technique won't work in C# soon enough ?
And when (if?) they implement generics, then their current collection classes will become "deprecated", so .NET framework classes will look pretty much like Java library - full of deprecated classes and interfaces. Anyway, the whole .NET is just Java in the mirror.
I vote pro drink ![Beer | [beer]](https://codeproject.global.ssl.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/beer.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote:
And when (if?) they implement generics, then their current collection classes will become "deprecated", so .NET framework classes will look pretty much like Java library - full of deprecated classes and interfaces. Anyway, the whole .NET is just Java in the mirror.
I agree that .NET is largely Bill Gates trying to outdo Scott McNealy, but I'd suggest that just because they impliment the ability to code in genercis does not mean they will replace what container classes they have. Adding generics is different to adding libraries that use them. I dunno how their current container classes work, but if they work, then there's no need to replace them, surely ?
Christian
I have come to clean zee pooollll. - Michael Martin Dec 30, 2001
Picture the daffodil. And while you do that, I'll be over here going through your stuff.
|
|
|
|
|
Christian Graus wrote:
Adding generics is different to adding libraries that use them.
I agree. There is much more to generics than container classes.
Christian Graus wrote:
I dunno how their current container classes work, but if they work, then there's no need to replace them, surely
If you ever worked with MFC collection classes, then you can say that .NET collections work pretty much like CObArray. When the generics are included, they will make something like CArray.
CObArray is bad because it does not give you type-safety, and you need to do some casting whenever you pull anything from it. Same goes for .NET collection classes: they contain only objects, which must be casted to whatever-we-think-they-really-are at the time you pick it.
I vote pro drink ![Beer | [beer]](https://codeproject.freetls.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/beer.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote:
If you ever worked with MFC collection classes, then you can say that .NET collections work pretty much like CObArray. When the generics are included, they will make something like CArray.
Yuck, yuck, yuck. In that case, I have no doubt generics will be with us soon. 
One would hope they would provide something like STL instead of something like the vile containers that come with MFC. Hell, if they give me generics and they provide more sucky CArray type classes, I'll sit down and write my own.
Christian
I have come to clean zee pooollll. - Michael Martin Dec 30, 2001
Picture the daffodil. And while you do that, I'll be over here going through your stuff.
|
|
|
|
|
MS has provided us with a collection generator which will produce a typed collection class for us to use. The downside is that you'd have to run the generator for every type you generate.
I wish I could find the link, but back for Beta 1 or Beta 2 someone had come up with a library that created typed collections at runtime; if I remember correctly you applied an attribute to a class, then at runtime you could create that class using the type you specify.
*James' eyes strain as he looks through 2000 e-mails*
Found it!
http://www.newtelligence.com/downloads/ntf/ntf01.asp
Now I'm gonna have to see if this works any better for me than using the generator for every collection I need.
James
Sonork ID: 100.11138 - Hasaki
"My words but a whisper -- your deafness a SHOUT.
I may make you feel but I can't make you think." - Thick as a Brick, Jethro Tull 1972
|
|
|
|
|
Cool - thanks for the link.
Christian
I have come to clean zee pooollll. - Michael Martin Dec 30, 2001
Picture the daffodil. And while you do that, I'll be over here going through your stuff.
|
|
|
|
|
Nemanja Trifunovic wrote:
Anyway, the whole .NET is just Java in the mirror.
EXACTLY!!!
- Khaled
In C we could create our own bugs. Now with C++ we can inherit them.
|
|
|
|
|
What do you mean M$ "Bob notwithstanding"??? Bob was one of the finest products Microsoft ever produced! I'm on the edge of my seat waiting for the XP version.
|
|
|
|
|
I'll be honest - I've never seen it, try though I might.
Christian
I have come to clean zee pooollll. - Michael Martin Dec 30, 2001
Picture the daffodil. And while you do that, I'll be over here going through your stuff.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
