Microsoft needs to visit Design school !

[Franklin]

I cannot believe the rubbish designs that Microsoft has come up with. Have
these morons even read the seminal design patterns book or visited a design
school. I was hoping that Microsoft will copy the decent designs in Java
or Smalltalk and give it the competition it deserves. But no, Anders Heilsberg
and co get down to work on C# even the revised VB.NET and what a mess they've
made. Seems Anders can't let go of brain dead design he learnt while writing
delphi at borland.

The naming convention makes me wanna puke. These morons even advice programmers
to use what looks like direct variables access (dont tell me about properties)
label4.Text="Bad Design" as opposed to conventional accessors and mutators.
Not to mention the brain dead event handling - cmbFormat.SelectedIndexChanged
+= new System.EventHandler(cmbFormat_SelectedIndexChanged) - what bollocks
! - why not use the observer pattern for fks sake. The result of this is
that most programmers grow up developing this bad habit.

So Bill hear me !, your boys also need to visit a comprehensive design school
- but them the GOF Design patterns book, not just security.

****, these cowboys can't program - I keep wishing their coding / design
was as good as their marketing. Cos love or loathe - this piece of crap will
succeed. But in the long run it will suffer the same fate that Microsoft
products are suffering at the moment - bad security, as they were not designed
with security in mind. The same is bound to happen to C# in the furture as
has ironically happened to VB - bad design principle !

What a **** SHAME !

[Jay Glynn]

Out for a morning troll?

>
> The naming convention makes me wanna puke. These morons even advice
programmers

At least the naming convention is consistent.

> to use what looks like direct variables access (dont tell me about
properties)
> label4.Text="Bad Design" as opposed to conventional accessors and
mutators.

If you took the time to look, the IL that is generated does your set_text
and get_text. This is what all properties compile to.

> Not to mention the brain dead event handling -
cmbFormat.SelectedIndexChanged
> += new System.EventHandler(cmbFormat_SelectedIndexChanged) - what bollocks
> ! - why not use the observer pattern for fks sake. The result of this is
> that most programmers grow up developing this bad habit.

Because the "observer pattern" is just as convoluted. There are advantages
either way, I don't think one or the other is "bad design".

Bad design or good design does not revolve around the usage of patterns.
Patterns are useful, but not the gospel.

[Kunle Odutola]

"Franklin" <franklin.francoz@freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3c7b57f1$1@10.1.10.29...

> The naming convention makes me wanna puke.

What would you suggest in it's place?. Copy the Java naming convention or
perhaps the Smalltalk one?
I don't like *everything* any of them but I use bits aof all. You don't have
to follow it in any case.

> These morons even advice programmers
> to use what looks like direct variables access (dont tell me about
properties)

You should learn about properties. They make all the difference in your
example. Basically, they are a syntactic shortcut that employ
accessors/mutators under the hood.

> Not to mention the brain dead event handling -
cmbFormat.SelectedIndexChanged
> += new System.EventHandler(cmbFormat_SelectedIndexChanged) - what bollocks
> ! - why not use the observer pattern for fks sake.

The event handling mechanism does follow the Observer pattern actually. The
notation above is how Observers register/unregister with Subjects. Once
again, syntactic shortcuts. Much better than the Listener implementation in
Java imo.

> The result of this is
> that most programmers grow up developing this bad habit.

Yes, please!

Kunle

[Jason]

"Franklin" <franklin.francoz@freeserve.co.uk> wrote:

>I cannot believe the rubbish designs that Microsoft has come up with...

Franklin, you'd probably be better off just sticking with Java.