*.net

This is a discussion on *.net within the C++ Programming forums, part of the General Programming Boards category; Thank you all . and can u plz answer my another question ... are all .net compilers 'visual' ?...

  1. #16
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    177
    Thank you all .
    and can u plz answer my another question ...
    are all .net compilers 'visual' ?

  2. #17
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    4,913
    No. In fact, most of them aren't.

  3. #18
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    177
    which of them are ?

  4. #19
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    4,913
    Visual Studio is what's called an "IDE" it's an editor for all-things-.NET, which has a built-in compiler. The compiler is probably the same as the command line compiler distributed as part of the .NET SDK, available for free download from Microsoft. I think Borland's got a C# compiler, but I don't know any details on that.

  5. #20
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    177
    tnx alot for ur help

  6. #21
    Registered User axon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Mt. Prospect, IL
    Posts
    2,572
    for J# for example you can use notepad or some syntax highlighter like JEdit and use vjc to compile the .jsl's

    some entropy with that sink? entropysink.com

    there are two cardinal sins from which all others spring: Impatience and Laziness. - franz kafka

  7. #22
    Super Moderator
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    4,913
    VS.NET is expensive unless you get lucky (it's not that hard, actually - see my latest poll in GD) and get a free copy. You might want to take a look at Eclipse. I haven't used it, but I know the goal was to create an IDE that you could use for any language. From what I hear, you can customize the syntax highlighting and formatting, etc... and then register a command line compiler with it. It's not "visual", but if you have some time to spare, it offers a lot of advantages and conveniences over using notepad, or something like that. The code will be easier to read as you write it, and all the tools you need are accessible in one place through an easy to use GUI.

  8. #23
    Registered User axon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Mt. Prospect, IL
    Posts
    2,572
    another thing about .NET i just thought of. Even though you need the .NET framework on any system for the programs to run in...but same thing is with java - you need the sdk downloaded in order to run it. .NET framework ~21MBs sdk ~60MBs

    some entropy with that sink? entropysink.com

    there are two cardinal sins from which all others spring: Impatience and Laziness. - franz kafka

  9. #24
    BMJ
    BMJ is offline
    Banal internet user BMJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Chicagoland
    Posts
    1,380
    Quote Originally Posted by master5001
    The .NET framework is a stupid trend that I was damn sure would have been gone by now when it was introduced a short time ago. Since it didn't die out, I fear it may evolve into an even stupider trend thats even more successful...
    You sir, are a completely ignorant fool!

    .NET is growing in popularity, and with good cause.

    Don't comment about this platform unless you actually know what you're talking about okthxbai.

  10. #25
    Banned master5001's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Visalia, CA, USA
    Posts
    3,685
    Oh i know what i'm talking about. My biggest issues with the framework are the fact that it is evolving so poorly. And yes it is popular, I believe I said that. The .NET framework adds a layer if indirection instead of truely attempting to be machine independant. It can best be compared to the JAVA VM. And like the JAVA VM its a great means to specific ends. But in general it isn't required.

    And I'm sorry, but if .NET were really wanted to work well Microsoft wouldn't be guarding the engine so closely. It would be an entirely open endeavour. Which as of now you can call it a selectively available engine. Instead of .NET would it not be more advantageous for Microsoft to just run elf files? Seems like a better venture, in my opinion.

  11. #26
    Crazy Fool Perspective's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,640
    Quote Originally Posted by axon
    another thing about .NET i just thought of. Even though you need the .NET framework on any system for the programs to run in...but same thing is with java - you need the sdk downloaded in order to run it. .NET framework ~21MBs sdk ~60MBs
    not exactly... you need the sdk to do develop apps, you only need the java runtime (JRE) to run them. The JRE is considerably smaller than the SDK, not sure of the exact size though. There are also many options for java SDK's/JRE's on any platform (SUN, IBM, BEA to name a few) there is only one option for .NET.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
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. Some .NET Distribution Stats
    By nickname_changed in forum C# Programming
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-14-2005, 03:41 AM
  3. IE 6 status bar
    By DavidP in forum Tech Board
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 10-23-2002, 05:31 PM
  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