Brain Washing - Page 10


DevX Home    Today's Headlines   Articles Archive   Tip Bank   Forums   

Page 10 of 11 FirstFirst ... 891011 LastLast
Results 136 to 150 of 153

Thread: Brain Washing

  1. #136
    Ian R Guest

    Re: Brain Washing


    "Joe "Nuke Me Xemu" Foster" <joe@bftsi0.UUCP> wrote in message
    news:3b9a9aa1@news.devx.com...
    >
    > Why the **** not, if he would have to rewrite everything anyway, even
    > if he stayed with TEOVBAWKI.NET? Perhaps Borland has learned from
    > Netscape's "rewrite it all" debacle, even if Microsoft appears too
    > arrogant by far to learn a damned thing from others' mistakes.
    >


    Because it's closer to VB6 than Delphi is. Depending on how the code is
    written he *may* have to rewrite *some* code when switching to VB.NET
    whereas in Delphi he *will* have to rewrite *everything*. Not to mention
    that VB.NET is pretty much similar to VB6. Delphi isn't.
    Or did you miss those points during one of your insane rants again ?



  2. #137
    Ian R Guest

    Re: Brain Washing


    "Joe "Nuke Me Xemu" Foster" <joe@bftsi0.UUCP> wrote in message
    news:3b9a9aa4@news.devx.com...
    >
    > As, no doubt, were "**** off mikee", "stf up", and "foad", right?
    >


    Looks who's talking. Or did you forget during one of your relapses ?



  3. #138
    Ian R Guest

    Re: Brain Washing


    "Joe "Nuke Me Xemu" Foster" <joe@bftsi0.UUCP> wrote in message
    news:3b9a9aa5@news.devx.com...
    >
    > Converting all resource-management classes to the Pure Stateless religion
    > is just "a little VB6 code"? Oh right, everything really should have been


    What are you ranting about now ? Making VB6 style apps is just as easy in
    VB.NET.

    > MTS-compliant anyway, including those classes never meant to be remoted,
    > like TextStream, right? Oops, silly me!


    Have you tried any of the .NET stuff, or are you another one of those
    jumping on the nearest bandwagon ?



  4. #139
    Ian R Guest

    Re: Brain Washing


    "Mike Mitchell" <kylix_is@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:3b9a5fcc.5976145@news.devx.com...
    >
    > What statements have I made criticising .NET (more specifically,
    > VB.NET) that you believe are wrong?
    >


    That you can't develop applications just as easily as in VB6.
    That the framework "is so full of bells and whistles that you can barely see
    the player anymore..."
    that it "needs a huge framework..."
    That you just can't give your app to somebody else
    That you "need to know trigonometry, geometry,algebra and other arcane stuff
    ...."
    That "No longer is it sufficient for a programmer just to use it. They have
    to understand how the intestines fit in the underbelly. "
    That "it's more complex..."
    That it "needs more memory..."
    etc etc ...

    You can develop applications just as easily as in VB6. In some cases even
    easier. The framework provides a usefull library that until now in some
    cases had to be done via hacks or os specfic api calls. The level of
    complexity rises in proportion to your application not the framework or
    language. The end distibution is only slightly larger than that of a VB6
    app. Unless of course you're writing a "Hello World" app. How often do apps
    like those get distributed ? Plus there's the addition of once the framework
    is installed you can simply copy the app over along with any supporting dlls
    required. There are no COM registration issues. Multiple versions can
    co-exist if needed. Memory usage has been about the same from what I've
    seen.

    >
    > No, the language is most definitely NOT essentially the same! This is
    > where we will, I fear, never agree. I have by now read several books
    > and other articles about VB.NET and it is but a distant cousin to real
    > VB. And I'm sorry if my use of "real" there gets your goat because by
    > implication that makes it look as if I am putting down VB.NET, well,
    > I'm sorry, but that is EXACTLY how I do see it. Classic VB is the
    > "real" Visual Basic and VB.NET is a Basic-like version of C#.
    >


    The language *is* essentially the same. There a few keywords that were
    removed or changed and some that were added but overall it's the same. Don't
    confuse keywords with features.
    What language is the following written in ?

    Dim i As Integer
    Dim x As Integer

    For i = 1 to 10
    x = x + i
    Next i

    or

    Text1.Text = "Some text"

    Looks about the same to me ....

    > Are you seriously suggesting that VB.NET is as good or as efficient an
    > approach for quick, small apps at which classic VB excelled? Fire up


    Yes.

    > classic VB, add controls, write some code, compile to an .Exe and give
    > to someone to use? Because to do that kind of thing with VB.NET you
    > first have to make sure that someone has
    >
    > (a) a PC that is hardware-wise capable of running the .NET framework
    > (b) that has the .NET framework installed, or
    > (c) if not already installed, can it *be* installed without any
    > possible interference with what is already running on that PC?
    >


    The hardware requirements are about the same. We've been through this
    before. Don't confuse the IDE with the application.
    VB.NET applications require the framework. VB6 applications require the
    runtime and any supporting dlls and ocxs. The end result is the same thing.
    Yes you can install the framework and it's apps on the same machine that has
    the VB6 runtime and it's apps.

    > Although producing the VB.NET-equivalent app might be as trivial as
    > the classic VB original (though I guess classic VB is inherently
    > easier to program in), when it comes to deployment, you have
    > potentially a huge mountain to climb.
    >


    What mountain is that ?

    > MM




  5. #140
    Phil Weber Guest

    Re: Brain Washing

    > Converting all resource-management classes to the Pure
    > Stateless religion is just "a little VB6 code?"


    Joe: Yes. Assuming you have code to allocate a resource in the class'
    Initialize event, and code to release it in the Terminate event, all you
    have to do to convert it to stateless is search the class for methods that
    use the resource, and copy the allocate and release code to the beginning
    and end of each such method. (If you have dozens or hundreds of such
    methods, you could probably write a routine in a few minutes to automate the
    process.)
    ---
    Phil Weber



  6. #141
    Mike Mitchell Guest

    Re: Brain Washing

    X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.21/32.243
    NNTP-Posting-Host: 194.164.6.222
    X-Trace: 9 Sep 2001 03:18:02 -0700, 194.164.6.222
    Lines: 12
    Path: news.devx.com
    Xref: news.devx.com vb.dotnet.discussion:30385

    On Sat, 08 Sep 2001 23:48:14 GMT, zane@mabry.com (Zane Thomas) wrote:

    >On Sat, 08 Sep 2001 18:13:28 GMT, kylix_is@hotmail.com (Mike Mitchell)
    >wrote:
    >
    >>Well, okay...I'm waiting!

    >
    >Waiting won't work Mike, you have to put effort into it.
    >

    Okay, then. I'm REALLY waiting!

    MM

  7. #142
    Joe \Nuke Me Xemu\ Foster Guest

    Re: Brain Washing

    "Phil Weber" <pweber@devx.com> wrote in message <news:3b9b1920$1@news.devx.com>...

    > > Converting all resource-management classes to the Pure
    > > Stateless religion is just "a little VB6 code?"

    >
    > Joe: Yes. Assuming you have code to allocate a resource in the class'
    > Initialize event, and code to release it in the Terminate event, all you
    > have to do to convert it to stateless is search the class for methods that
    > use the resource, and copy the allocate and release code to the beginning
    > and end of each such method. (If you have dozens or hundreds of such
    > methods, you could probably write a routine in a few minutes to automate the
    > process.)


    And when this forces every method to be really slow, I'm just supposed
    to lie back and think of Microsoft?

    --
    Joe Foster <mailto:jlfoster%40znet.com> DC8s in Spaace: <http://www.xenu.net/>
    WARNING: I cannot be held responsible for the above They're coming to
    because my cats have apparently learned to type. take me away, ha ha!



  8. #143
    Joe \Nuke Me Xemu\ Foster Guest

    Re: Brain Washing

    "Phil Weber" <pweber@devx.com> wrote in message <news:3b9b1920$1@news.devx.com>...

    > > Converting all resource-management classes to the Pure
    > > Stateless religion is just "a little VB6 code?"

    >
    > Joe: Yes.


    So you now deny the existence of classes for which a stateless design is
    not practical? Do you have a link handy to your published repudiation of
    your own article,

    "Classes that use scarce resources and for which a stateless design is not
    practical will be hardest hit by the lack of deterministic finalization. Unfortunately, it looks like you'll have to provide AddRef,
    Release, and
    Dispose methods, and instruct users of the class to call these methods at
    appropriate times in order to allow the class to track references and free
    its resources when the last reference is released."
    -- Phil Weber, http://www.devx.com/free/press/2000/102500.asp

    --
    Joe Foster <mailto:jlfoster%40znet.com> L. Ron Dullard <http://www.xenu.net/>
    WARNING: I cannot be held responsible for the above They're coming to
    because my cats have apparently learned to type. take me away, ha ha!



  9. #144
    Joe \Nuke Me Xemu\ Foster Guest

    Re: Brain Washing

    "Ian R" <ianr@na.net> wrote in message <news:3b9b07ec$1@news.devx.com>...

    > "Joe "Nuke Me Xemu" Foster" <joe@bftsi0.UUCP> wrote in message
    > news:3b9a9aa1@news.devx.com...
    > >
    > > Why the **** not, if he would have to rewrite everything anyway, even
    > > if he stayed with TEOVBAWKI.NET? Perhaps Borland has learned from
    > > Netscape's "rewrite it all" debacle, even if Microsoft appears too
    > > arrogant by far to learn a damned thing from others' mistakes.


    > Because it's closer to VB6 than Delphi is. Depending on how the code is


    So you claim Delphi is also garbage-collected? That deterministic
    finalization is *unavailable* in Delphi, just as it is in TEOVBAWKI?

    > written he *may* have to rewrite *some* code when switching to VB.NET
    > whereas in Delphi he *will* have to rewrite *everything*. Not to mention
    > that VB.NET is pretty much similar to VB6. Delphi isn't.
    > Or did you miss those points during one of your insane rants again ?


    "Mommy, where did my MousePointer go?"

    "It went to the big Garbage Collection in the sky, honey!"

    http://www.devx.com/free/press/2000/102500.asp

    --
    Joe Foster <mailto:jlfoster%40znet.com> Got Thetans? <http://www.xenu.net/>
    WARNING: I cannot be held responsible for the above They're coming to
    because my cats have apparently learned to type. take me away, ha ha!



  10. #145
    Zane Thomas Guest

    Re: Brain Washing

    On Sun, 9 Sep 2001 20:12:59 -0700, "Joe \"Nuke Me Xemu\" Foster"
    <joe@bftsi0.UUCP> wrote:

    >So you claim Delphi is also garbage-collected?


    He never made any such claim Joe, a fact which is obvious to you no doubt.
    So Joe, what's the motivation for your continued rants here? Don't you
    have anything better to do?


    --
    The nice thing about standards is that
    there are so many of them to choose from.

  11. #146
    Ian R Guest

    Re: Brain Washing


    "Joe "Nuke Me Xemu" Foster" <joe@bftsi0.UUCP> wrote in message
    news:3b9c32cd@news.devx.com...
    >
    > So you claim Delphi is also garbage-collected? That deterministic
    > finalization is *unavailable* in Delphi, just as it is in TEOVBAWKI?
    >


    What the heck are you taking Joe ?? We're talking about language syntax.



  12. #147
    Zane Thomas Guest

    Re: Brain Washing

    On Mon, 10 Sep 2001 00:45:44 -0400, "Ian R" <ianr@na.net> wrote:

    >What the heck are you taking Joe ?


    Whatever it is it isn't what the doctor prescribed. Joe is on a non-stop
    rant-a-thon and so if the topic at hand doesn't present a direct
    opportunity to rant, he rants anyway.

    It's kind of amusing to see the two most persistent, and boring,
    anti.vb.net posters here haven't even bothered to install it and give it a
    go. And they expect people to take them as reliable sources? ROFL!


    --
    The nice thing about standards is that
    there are so many of them to choose from.

  13. #148
    Phil Weber Guest

    Re: Brain Washing

    > So you now deny the existence of classes for which
    > a stateless design is not practical?


    Joe: No, where did I say that?
    ---
    Phil Weber



  14. #149
    Phil Weber Guest

    Re: Brain Washing

    > And when this forces every method to be really slow...?

    Joe: IF a stateless design results in unacceptably slow execution, then you
    investigate alternatives. See http://www.devx.com/free/press/2000/102500.asp
    ---
    Phil Weber



  15. #150
    Rob Teixeira Guest

    Re: Brain Washing


    "Dan Fergus" <dan@vbforest.com> wrote:
    >
    >Instead of converting a little VB6 code to VB.NET you are willing to convert
    >_MOST_ of the VB code to Kylix and then fix the rest by hand. That's what

    I
    >find amazing. Leaner a new language from the ground up and convert ?% of
    >your VB code to the new language.


    What I find truly amazing is that he is willing to convert using a converter
    he has no practical knowledge of to a language he understands almost nothing
    about. So, even if the conversion works perfectly, what's he going to do
    if he can't understand the code?

    Which brings us right back to where we started: this is nothing more than
    an emotional outburst with no logic to back it up.

    >It just doesn't make sense to me.


    Little he says does.

    >Why not invest a little time in learning
    >VB.NET? It really is not that hard.


    I think he's supposed to be doing that - "knowing your enemy" as he put it
    - but I don't see any evidence of it.

    -Rob

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
HTML5 Development Center
 
 
FAQ
Latest Articles
Java
.NET
XML
Database
Enterprise
Questions? Contact us.
C++
Web Development
Wireless
Latest Tips
Open Source


   Development Centers

   -- Android Development Center
   -- Cloud Development Project Center
   -- HTML5 Development Center
   -- Windows Mobile Development Center