.NET woes

This is a discussion on .NET woes within the A Brief History of Cprogramming.com forums, part of the Community Boards category; >As for Bubba, believing that the only option to be marketable in the job industry is to learn C++/CLI, seems ...

  1. #16
    Crazy Fool Perspective's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,640
    >As for Bubba, believing that the only option to be marketable in the job industry is to learn C++/CLI, seems to me rather naive.


    That's right, he could learn Java for example

  2. #17
    Code Goddess Prelude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    9,796
    >I hope I'm wrong.
    I think you are. Open source projects have a habit of sprouting where they're most needed. If C++/CLI grows to the point where people badly want those tools but don't want to pay for them, you'll see the free stuff showing up more and more.

    >Oh... and say goodbye to portability.
    In a way, portability is a myth.

    >It's the possibility that they may push C++/CLI as the replacement for ISO
    >C++ programming that scares me.
    The chance of that is vanishingly small. I can't begin to fathom why you would think that Microsoft's version of C++, that breaks every guideline for the ISO standard, could possibly replace it.

    >believing that the only option to be marketable in the job industry is to learn C++/CLI, seems
    >to me rather naive.
    He never said it was the only option, just the most popular. If you remove the most popular options, getting a job is considerably more difficult, and failing to recognize that is naive.
    My best code is written with the delete key.

  3. #18
    Cat without Hat CornedBee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    8,893
    Quote Originally Posted by Prelude
    The chance of that is vanishingly small. I can't begin to fathom why you would think that Microsoft's version of C++, that breaks every guideline for the ISO standard, could possibly replace it.
    Because in the future, interesting new features of Windows might only be accessible through a CLI API that has no native equivalent.
    All the buzzt!
    CornedBee

    "There is not now, nor has there ever been, nor will there ever be, any programming language in which it is the least bit difficult to write bad code."
    - Flon's Law

  4. #19
    Code Goddess Prelude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    9,796
    >Because in the future, interesting new features of Windows might only be
    >accessible through a CLI API that has no native equivalent.
    Are you suggesting that the standards committee will feel obligated to support a proprietary API as an exception? Given past decisions by the committe about features and additions, I predict that the C++ standard will simply ignore these "interesting new features" and let implementations deal with them as non-portable extensions.
    My best code is written with the delete key.

  5. #20
    Anti-Poster
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Posts
    1,399
    Quote Originally Posted by Mario F.
    Oh... and say goodbye to portability.
    This is probably my favorite "I won't use .Net" myth to debunk. Why should I say goodbye to portability? The Mono project is in the process of implementing the CLR and the standard class libraries on a number of different OS's. If an OS has those two components, then it can run any CLS-compliant .Net application. Then the question becomes "Is a CLS-compliant application capable of doing anything useful?" Everything developed by the company I work for is CLS-compliant with the sole exception of registry operations (which could be handled by a config file) so I'd say so.
    If I did your homework for you, then you might pass your class without learning how to write a program like this. Then you might graduate and get your degree without learning how to write a program like this. You might become a professional programmer without knowing how to write a program like this. Someday you might work on a project with me without knowing how to write a program like this. Then I would have to do you serious bodily harm. - Jack Klein

  6. #21
    Crazy Fool Perspective's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,640
    > The Mono project is in the process of implementing the CLR and the standard class libraries on a number of different OS's.


    And as soon as mono is usefull MS will step in to get its dirty little fingers in the cookie jar. There's no way a company like that will let their technology run for free on other platforms. Its just not the MS way....

  7. #22
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,475
    Hmm... let me make this clear. I'm not going to use .Net because... you got it, i don't want to.
    Not because I think it's better, worse, more colorful, dull, cute or ugly.

    If you prefer, I'm not going to use .Net because it is a personal choice. Just like, for instance, I don't feel interested in learning Delphi. I just... don't want to.

    As for Mono... it has been around since the beta versions of .Net. Or close, I can't remember. It will always be a step behind Microsoft implementation of .Net. If I remember correctly, it took Mono 5 months to keep up with the .Net Framework 2.0 and it is still struggling to. And this is just for ASP.Net.

    It's a viable solution, sure. But one that comes at the cost of lenghty compatibility updates. And I'm sure Microsoft will not be waiting for Mono to come up with new versions... nor it will think of Mono when changing function locations and whatnot like it so much enjoys to do with the DirectX API.
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  8. #23
    train spotter
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    near a computer
    Posts
    3,856
    >>Oh... and say goodbye to portability.

    Why is portability so important?



    Approx 90% of home PCs run windows so limited extra return for a portable app (compared to a MS only app).

    The biggest expense (IMO) in development is time costs (wages). If an app can be developed in significantly less time using a MS product (or targeting only a MS OS), then BAs will push that type of development.

    I have coded, in a commercial capacity, for very high volume online trading sites, embedded XP for industrial devices and desktop apps.

    Never needed any of these projects to be portable, as the target OS was always specified in the business requirements or by the hardware used.

    Nor has specializing in MS technologies limited the projects I can work on.
    "Man alone suffers so excruciatingly in the world that he was compelled to invent laughter."
    Friedrich Nietzsche

    "I spent a lot of my money on booze, birds and fast cars......the rest I squandered."
    George Best

    "If you are going through hell....keep going."
    Winston Churchill

  9. #24
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,475
    I do agree that portability is playing a lower role. That has to do though with a lot of factors. Lack of vision from customers/solution providers, lack of knowledge, commercial companies pushing their "way of life", developer lazyness...

    However portability is important despite the number of systems running MS Windows. If for anything else because I'm sure nobody in here would want to see a Windows only world. Lack of portability only serves the commercial brands. When Microsoft started their hype with the .Net Beta version, they did it by exacerbating the portable nature of the framework. Back then, 5 years ago or something, Linux was still posing a serious threat to Microsoft. Now that the waters have calmed, portability is no longer an issue. In fact, it's an enemy of a company that wants "every computer in america to run microsoft windows" (sic).

    But... just as an example. 3 years ago The Portuguese Ministry of Higher Education (concentrates on universities) wanted to migrate to Linux. The cost was huge. The whole Visual Basic base had to be rewriten, Microsoft SQL Server databases migrated and queries rewritten and many other factors. I don't know them all. I was simply in charge of evaluating the VB migration. The idea was to move to a more cost effective IT solution.

    It had to be abandoned. The time needed for the migration and the costs involved with hiring coders were simply too overwhelming. And to this day, the Ministry still has to pay Microsoft for every single computer, every single server. Bulk licenses, of course.

    Meanwhile, on a small room, just like in the movies, an old computer still ran some legacy C code. That computer migration cost was calculated in 160 Euros. The cost of buying a new HD and of the guy installing linux and compiling the C code.
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  10. #25
    pwns nooblars
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Portland, Or
    Posts
    1,094
    I try and make most of my code portable not because linux > windows or anything like that (I do believe that is true in a lot of cases) but more so that down the road, when the leading OS has changed, the API for it has changed, and all the other changes, I will still be able to use the same programing habits. I seriously considered learning to use DirectX due to it being the API that Microsoft supports and 90% of the time (atleast) my code will be executed on a MSOS.

    But being forced into .NET to use it, I would rather not. I am not a professional game developer or anything, and that isn't my goal, learning game programming is more for a greater understanding.

  11. #26
    train spotter
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    near a computer
    Posts
    3,856
    >>3 years ago The Portuguese Ministry of Higher Education (concentrates on universities) wanted to migrate to Linux. The cost was huge.

    I helped port one of Australia's largest banks online share trading site from Oracle based system to a MS SQL Server + white label solution.

    Cost was huge over the 18 months it took to complete.

    A senior developer's time is charged (by the company) at nearly Au$170/h and I was only one of a large team (>30 coders and testers).


    Six months later, a merger ment they had to port everything to JAVA ....
    (one bank had a contract stating that JAVA would be used, the others did not == move to JAVA)

    Moral: Choices in technologies used in major development are rarely based on the best fit for the project at hand and are usually mede by people who know very little about the merits of one over the other.
    "Man alone suffers so excruciatingly in the world that he was compelled to invent laughter."
    Friedrich Nietzsche

    "I spent a lot of my money on booze, birds and fast cars......the rest I squandered."
    George Best

    "If you are going through hell....keep going."
    Winston Churchill

  12. #27
    the hat of redundancy hat nvoigt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Hannover, Germany
    Posts
    3,139
    I don't understand why people took to .NET so fast, half the people in my programming classes love it, and I can't see why.
    Because it's RAD without the nasty VB behind it. C# can create a productive commercial solution in probably half the time. I love C++, but I cannot justify charging double rates just because I like C++ better. C# gets the job done in 90% of business needs and in 50-80% of the time needed for a native C++ application. And don't anyone dare to tell me that a Win32 project or something involving DirectX, MFC, ATL, COM would be any more portable. The interface to our banking software a a windows DLL. The interface to our inhouse accounting software is an OCX. The interface to the post code labelling software is a windows DLL. Portability is for people who want to do it right and for people who have too much time on their hands. Businesses are neither. They care for ROI, right now.
    hth
    -nv

    She was so Blonde, she spent 20 minutes looking at the orange juice can because it said "Concentrate."

    When in doubt, read the FAQ.
    Then ask a smart question.

  13. #28
    Code Monkey Davros's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    812
    >Am I to understand now that MS is forcing us to use .NET to do mail, internet, messaging, etc, etc?

    But for other things, the Win API seems the only way to do things:

    http://www.itwriting.com/blog/?postid=486
    OS: Windows XP
    Compilers: MinGW (Code::Blocks), BCB 5

    BigAngryDog.com

  14. #29
    (?<!re)tired Mario F.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    7,475
    So, nvoigt, are you saying there is no market for C++? That it is just a toy for those who like it and it can only be justly applied on systems where a framework the likes of .Net was not created?

    I formulate my opinions on this matter mostly on what I read here and there. However you guys use these tools at a professional level. I am curious as to if I'm learning a programmin language that, from what I'm reading here, is dying.
    The programmer’s wife tells him: “Run to the store and pick up a loaf of bread. If they have eggs, get a dozen.”
    The programmer comes home with 12 loaves of bread.


    Originally Posted by brewbuck:
    Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.

  15. #30
    Code Goddess Prelude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    9,796
    >Linux is not free.
    You know perfectly well what I meant. Linux is free in that there's not necessarily a direct cost in legally acquiring it. Sure, some distros are sold retail, and there's certainly the indirect cost of net access for downloads and the time spent installing and learning the system. But with that line of thinking, we'll spend more time specifying our definition of the word "free" rather than talking about more interesting things.
    My best code is written with the delete key.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. migrate from .Net 2.0 to .Net 3.0
    By George2 in forum C# Programming
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-25-2007, 04:07 AM
  2. Serial port woes (visual C++ .NET 2003)
    By RancidWannaRiot in forum Windows Programming
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-21-2005, 07:59 AM
  3. Some .NET Distribution Stats
    By nickname_changed in forum C# Programming
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-14-2005, 03:41 AM
  4. .net
    By ygfperson in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 02-15-2002, 12:15 AM
  5. Visual J#
    By mfc2themax in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-08-2001, 02:41 PM

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21