|
Ian Shlasko wrote: Granted, Visual Studio has something to do with that... Haven't found a better IDE anywhere.
I will have to agree with that... I'm currently using Eclipse and it pisses me off on a regular basis.
Ian Shlasko wrote: Unity is several kinds of awesome
As in Ubuntu's Unity? ...there has never been a slower interface ever developed for Linux! I actually stopped using Ubuntu because of Unity, now I use Mint (grant it, it's still based on Ubuntu but with a better interface).
|
|
|
|
|
No no no no....
Unity 3D... The game development IDE...
|
|
|
|
|
Was wondering about that... it didn't make sense but I've also never heard of Unity 3D. 
|
|
|
|
|
I haven't actually managed to make anything playable with it, but that's because I aimed a little too high... Like... Alpha Centauri...
But I wrote a hex-map model and generator in C#/Unity, and it worked really well... It makes the graphical side really easy.
One of these days I'll go back to that... But once I started planning out the AI, I realized I had designed it so complicated that it'd make Black and White look like Tetris by comparison.
|
|
|
|
|
Ian Shlasko wrote: Haven't found a better IDE anywhere
The only IDE that comes close is the one made by JetBrains, which I use a lot for Ruby and Java stuff.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: frankly, C# is the most elegant and well crafted language I've ever worked with
Yes, it is.
Even though I still miss a QUICK compiler like Delphi had (and sometimes a linker), and aw, the joy of compiling your own VCL. Being able to allocate and deallocate by hand also seemed to be better than having the memory fill up until some lowpriority thread halts your app and starts cleaning up - even though NET4 does a good job at it, I'd rather still be doing it myself.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
I agree - but it does mean it's a lot harder to get leaky programs. Not impossible, but a lot harder. You remember what it was like before C# - morons not releasing memory until the whole PC judders to a halt... 
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: a lot harder to get leaky programs
I disagree. When you're programming in something that demands you manage your own memory, you tend to be very aware of leaks, and program more carefully.
Many a C# programmer just assumes that it will be handled for them, and happily leave event handlers waving in the wind, preventing megabytes being cleaned up.
Not me, of course, but others
PooperPig - Coming Soon
|
|
|
|
|
_Maxxx_ wrote: When you're a competent programmer is programming in something that demands you manage your own memory, you tend to be very aware of leaks, and program more carefully.
Unfortunately, a large number of developers aren't competent, but think they are.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Most agree C# is good but times are changing again. First it comes with the overhead of the framework, undeterministic memory management with garbage collectors. Devices are getting smaller and competition on the server side is cutting into profits. Simply put in terms of performance per $ it cannot win on the server side and as mobile app with C++. We are slowly moving to true massive parallelism using GPU computing and it is doable with managed code going through some extra steps to bridge native and managed but why doing it? Modern languages tend to be more verbose. C++ code is terse, impressively logic and amazingly modern and relevant despite old age. C# facilities are nothing more than iteration of STL or Boost. The only advantage is UI but with Web front this is no longer main consideration in choosing the language. C# is evolving and there is nothing wrong with it (I am using .Net extensively) but looking forward, surprisingly, for many applications C# may not be the best choice.
|
|
|
|
|
Until VS2008 (more I don't know) I found a flaw that I hate: it is impossible to separate definition and implementation in separate files.
Also, it is slow to compile, it uses that crappy .NET framework with the crappier documentation and it is slow to compute unless you fill it up with unsafe.
I AM biased because I really need low-level functionalities, the only time I ued C# was to create a VS add-in to view areas of memory as 8 or 16 bit images and apply some algorithms and infinite zoom (with no blurring, must be exactly a pixel per pixel representation). The areas of memory come directly from the VS debugger on a running process, and it has to understand variable names, pointers, raw addresses and some internal data structures. With C# it is painfully slow, where the older counterpart of this add-in, developed in VB6, is fast as a Thunder (btw Thunder WAS the codename of VB6  ).
It has some good points, i like the UI designer and its way of managing events, but stil... I will hate the day we switch off VB6 and turn to C#.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aye. I'm strange, I know, but it is easier (and faster) to make communications between two native environments than managed-native. Also the easy access to COM, OCX and WinAPI provided with VB is somewhat lacking in C#.
For projects that are no more than a boxed set of switches, VB6 is faster and easier. For project a little more complicated, .NET is bloated (to make I-don't-remember-which operation on a bitmap created in memory I would have to pin, extrapolate and use a ton of image converters between Windows.Media.Something.SomethingElse and Windows.Forms.Image forth and back. I solved wrapping GDI calls).
Of course this is my opinion, and I'm far from being guru or expert. I just hope that M$ changes its mind and releases a VB7. Native, updated VB6.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: I just hope that M$ changes its mind and releases a VB7. Native, updated VB6.
Bad news - it's not going to happen.
Have you tried C++? I use that when I want the down to the metal, tiny, high-performance stuff (or native C if really pushed).
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
I'd really enjoy hearing your thoughts on the down-side of 'var. thanks, Bill
«OOP to me means only messaging, local retention and protection and hiding of state-process, and extreme late-binding of all things. » Alan Kay's clarification on what he meant by the term "Object" in "Object-Oriented Programming."
|
|
|
|
|
den2k88 wrote: it is slow to compile,
Odd, I find quite the opposite to be the case.
den2k88 wrote: it uses that crappy .NET framework
While there's some things about the framework I am happy to b*tch about, for the most part, I think it's pretty damn impressive.
den2k88 wrote: it is slow to compute unless you fill it up with unsafe.
Again, not in my experience. I've written some very computationally intensive stuff in C# and have been very pleased with the performance.
den2k88 wrote: because I really need low-level functionalities
Well, true -- for bit banging on hardware ports, definitely C, C++ or even assembly is the way to go.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
I concur. I started on Assembler and FORTRAN, added Pascal, PL/1 and COBOL then on to C and C++ with a side order of umpteen variants of BASIC along with Rexx and some other scripting languages. I moved to C# when it was version 1.0 and railed against it's limitations while liking it's ease of use. With 3.0 it finally started being really useful. Like Griffy-babe says, it's become easier to abuse it with var, etc. - but I don't, and my team doesn't - we are like-minded, thank goodness - so most of the time, everything is peachy!
C# - an exercise in trying to design the ideal multipurpose language that [almost] works perfectly.
Well done Microsoft! ...in this particular instance.
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
Forogar wrote: Griffy-babe
Watch it sunshine! 
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
My humblest apologies... I got carried away!
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
|
cpp11 is awesome. If you've been away for a while I encourage you to return to c++
|
|
|
|
|
_Josh_ wrote: return to c++
Why am I reminded of Darth Vader?
I've been doing some cpp11 work on the Beaglebone, it certainly has changed quite a bit and requires a lot of re-learning on my part.
Marc
|
|
|
|
|
Yup, pretty much a new language. Used well it is very elegant and I've found it refreshing and enjoyable.
|
|
|
|
|
I have to say I like writing my own apps in C# where I have complete control of all the code and data types.
However when I'm customizing an existing CMS platform, the flexibility of duck typing means that I have much more flexibility and power to make smaller and less invasive changes, even if I have to code in PHP  .
|
|
|
|
|
(Old thread, but I'm just catching up now)
I've earned a living as a C++ developer for a dozen years or so before moving on to C# over 7 years ago. I haven't looked back.
Well, I have looked at some of my old C++ code a couple of times, and the thought I have every single time is that I don't miss it at all.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
