|
|
A very interesting language which is easy to learn for an C# coder. The new feautures of Comega are very cool -.-
|
|
|
|
|
The actual language syntax is normally quick to learn... it's the function / class library that takes ages; PHP must have over 500 functions, Java has its class library, .NET different classes again. Then DHTML/DOM has it's range of HTML "objects".
I think it would be tough to maintain proficiency with more than 3 or 4 libraries.. anyone tried it?
|
|
|
|
|
This is my third go-round with MS's successor to VB.
Every time they come out with a new iteration it's like a slap in the face.
It would be great if they came out with a printer object with the simplicity of the VB6 version.
In any event, the handwriting seems to be on the wall for VB6, so I'm struggling to become proficient with what I lovingly - HAH! - call B# (VB 2005).
- Life is a fountain
|
|
|
|
|
Lol, I think VB has come a long way since VB6.
It's still simple, but you need the .NET framework and that one is large.
WM.
What about weapons of mass-construction?
|
|
|
|
|
I'm learning C#/.NET.
Although I know C++/MFC the best, I hate it! I consider MFC a "gimmick-based" architecture. If you want to do something new, you have to start a research project to find the "gimmick" that does it. There's no consistency to MFC/Windows. For example, to keep a window updated, you must provide an OnDraw () method. Fair enough. BUT IT DOESN'T WORK FOR DIALOGS! Then you try it for a frame window, AND IT DOESN'T WORK THERE EITHER! (But for a different reason). Or you set the text color in MFC, AND THE FRAMEWORK JUST IGNORES YOU. This just scratches the surface of the MFC/Windows framework's irritations.
The unending annoyances of MFC drove me to try Java programming, and now C#. What a difference! Unlike the gimmick-based MFC, in C# everything's classes and properties. Things that used to be nearly impossible to figure out how to do, now appear in seconds with Intellisense.
C# combines the easy forms of Visual Basic with the flexibility and large class library of Java, with the power of C++ (through unmanaged code).
MFC will become a dead language like PL/I or Sanskrit. Good riddance!
|
|
|
|
|
I agree, c++/mfc always seemed to me like Fizzbin, Microsoft made up the rules as they went along.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alan C. Balkany wrote:
C# combines the easy forms of Visual Basic with the flexibility and large class library of Java, with the power of C++ (through unmanaged code).
C# does not have the power of C++, managed or unmanaged.
Alan C. Balkany wrote:
MFC will become a dead language
MFC is not a language.
My programming blahblahblah blog. If you ever find anything useful here, please let me know to remove it.
|
|
|
|
|
C# does not have the power of C++, managed or unmanaged.
Unmanaged C# can use pointers like C++. There is nothing inherently superior about C++. With Just-in-time compiling, C# can take advantage of newer processors, unlike statically-compiled C++ code.
I've read that currently the Microsoft C++ compiler does some optimization after the IL code is generated, but there is no reason why the C# compiler couldn't do the same thing (and future releases probably will.)
MFC is not a language.
Semantic quibbling. OK, MFC will become a dead framework. Happy?
Alan
|
|
|
|
|
Alan C. Balkany wrote:
There is nothing inherently superior about C++.
But there is. C++ has so many features that C# does not have. Try to make this[^] in C#.
Alan C. Balkany wrote:
but there is no reason why the C# compiler couldn't do the same thing (and future releases probably will.)
There is. C# specifications puts some constraints that will *always* make C# slower. Actually, in Visual Studio 2005. the difference in performance between two compilers increases rather than decreases.
Alan C. Balkany wrote:
Semantic quibbling. OK, MFC will become a dead framework. Happy?
No, it is not quibbling. There are many great C++ libraries and frameworks that will outlive Windows Forms.
My programming blahblahblah blog. If you ever find anything useful here, please let me know to remove it.
|
|
|
|
|
Alan C. Balkany wrote:
> MFC is not a language.
Semantic quibbling.
I agree. Also, a cheap shot. These days, there is no difference between a language, it's major IDE (if it has one), and it's API. Java is not just a language, it is also an API. As is VB. C++ in Visual Studio means: the C++ language, Visual C++ IDE, and MFC. Your post is comparing C#.Net with C++/MFC, so it is obvious what you meant.
Perhaps, to save yourself from pedantry, you should have said "Visual C++ and MFC are a a dead language and framework, respectively". Or you could just say "MFC is a dead language", and expect people to have better things to do than pick it apart.
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
I think C# has the power, only you will have to discover most of it 
For example:
- P/Invoke
- Managed directX (ok, 7% slower than C++ code)
- Managed code (no @#$%$#% with pointers and memory leaks)
The framework is so huge, you won't know all of it after a year 
WM.
What about weapons of mass-construction?
|
|
|
|
|
-prakash
|
|
|
|
|
Heh, I've been learning tons of new stuff in the last 6 months...Am nowhere near the proficiency level I want to reach in C++, but am getting there quickly!
I have however been having a lot of fun learning the inner workings of WinCE, using embedded visual C++ as tool of the trade...PocketPC programming makes you think hard on what you're doing, and that I like. So much more tricky then using Borland's builder environments to create windows applications...
I also found that script languages like XSL are really easy to understand, and only slightly tricky to implement! :p
Greetings,
Robin
"Never seem more learned than the people you are with. Wear your learning like a pocket watch and keep it hidden. Do not pull it out to count the hours, but give the time when you are asked."
|
|
|
|
|
anybody know how to write in mips??? i'm trying to write the code for quick sort and insertion sort. any help or useful links may help. thanks
|
|
|
|
|
Two things:
1: Wrong forum pal!
2: Look for a dictionary "Pseudo code - MIPS"
There is enough pseudo code around the internet, that you can use.
I also got the blogging virus..[^]
|
|
|
|
|
I did a crashcourse Java, I can work with it. (I build compilers atm)
But there's something about Java I still not like, mostly the information on the internet.
In my opinion there's little good information on building java software. In opposite of .NET software. We need more websites like codeproject, but then for java projects.
WM.
What about weapons of mass-construction?
|
|
|
|
|
I started learning Ruby last year, since I've heard a lot about this dynamic language. After a couple of days I realized I am not going to need it and went to improve Perl  which I do need.
My programming blahblahblah blog. If you ever find anything useful here, please let me know to remove it.
|
|
|
|
|
my name kashif sabeeh and i wish that i come in your registration and learn many more
|
|
|
|
|
WELCOME .....YOU WILL FIND RIGHT PEOPLE HERE TO LEARN AND DISCUSSION .
keep smilling.....b'coz smile is the shortest distance between people....
|
|
|
|
|
I thought for a few weeks ago that I knew C++ pretty well and I thought that I should take my design skills to the next level. I started to read some articles about policy based design, pressing links to other articles of interest and ended up buying "Modern C++ Desgin" by Andrei Alexandrescu... It's just amazing how much you can do with templates and partial template specialization.
After reading some chapters I found myself writing code completely different then before. It's more like I'm writing in a different language, programming the compiler for static type safety and abusing templates for code generation and much more.
I also got the blogging virus..[^]
|
|
|
|
|
I read parts of that book myself a couple of years ago. I remember thinking... wow this is really cool...
It seemed a little over complicated in a lot of ways though. I had a hard time understanding where I would apply some of the really advanced template stuff. Probably just me.. Have you actually used these techniques in production code? How so?
|
|
|
|
|
I've done some template metaprogramming. The code is unreadable, and the programs it produces are so much bigger that they don't fit in cache. Also, debugging is impossible! ! It is a cool concept, but it is impractical unless some language improvements are made.
|
|
|
|
|
Some things are indeed a little overcomplicated. I use only the basic stuff, such as the Loki::Select template. It avoids stuff like overloading one method a zillion times for each parameter type when only one is necessary.
I Also have to watch out not going completly berserk and make a template out of every class. Like the other replier mentioned, it makes code harder to debug, less readable and your code size becomes exponential.
But the stuff is great for designing highly flexible libraries and very reusable code. And it's like everything else in the programmers world: "it's not holy, just something to keep in your arsenal!"
I also got the blogging virus..[^]
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
