.NET equals Efficiency


DevX Home    Today's Headlines   Articles Archive   Tip Bank   Forums   

Page 1 of 11 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 151

Thread: .NET equals Efficiency

  1. #1
    Kevin Guest

    .NET equals Efficiency



    Coding in .NET is amazing. Everything is so fast and simple. By using VB.NET
    I just wrote an algorithm to solve world hunger. That was never possible
    under VB6. My speech at the UN is next week.

    Thanks, .NET

  2. #2
    simon Guest

    Re: .NET equals Efficiency

    Will the project to colonize Mars be done by tomorrow then?

    simon


    "Kevin" <kdole@un.com> wrote in message news:3c72c4d9$1@10.1.10.29...
    >
    >
    > Coding in .NET is amazing. Everything is so fast and simple. By using

    VB.NET
    > I just wrote an algorithm to solve world hunger. That was never possible
    > under VB6. My speech at the UN is next week.
    >
    > Thanks, .NET




  3. #3
    Mike Mitchell Guest

    Re: .NET equals Efficiency

    On 19 Feb 2002 13:34:17 -0800, "Kevin" <kdole@un.com> wrote:

    >Coding in .NET is amazing. Everything is so fast and simple. By using VB.NET
    >I just wrote an algorithm to solve world hunger. That was never possible
    >under VB6. My speech at the UN is next week.
    >
    >Thanks, .NET


    Although I appreciate the sarcasm, the sad thing is that some
    evangelists will actually read this at face value and be desperately
    trying to locate the UN web site to buy a ticket.

    Put us out of our misery and tell us the URL, hey?

    MM

  4. #4
    Ray Collins Guest

    Re: .NET equals Efficiency

    Too late,

    I heard that Zane did it better and faster in C# last week :-)

    "Kevin" <kdole@un.com> wrote in message news:3c72c4d9$1@10.1.10.29...
    >
    >
    > Coding in .NET is amazing. Everything is so fast and simple. By using

    VB.NET
    > I just wrote an algorithm to solve world hunger. That was never possible
    > under VB6. My speech at the UN is next week.
    >
    > Thanks, .NET




  5. #5
    Robert Scoble Guest

    Re: .NET equals Efficiency

    > Coding in .NET is amazing. Everything is so fast and simple. By using
    VB.NET
    > I just wrote an algorithm to solve world hunger. That was never possible
    > under VB6. My speech at the UN is next week.


    ****, all you did was solve world hunger? Geesh, with all the stuff in .NET
    you should have been able to also find a cure for cancer. And in your free
    time you should have been able to have figured out what really happened when
    the universe was created.

    Oh, and my friend who's building the next space telescope would like some
    help figuring out the right materials to keep the thing from shaking when it
    goes from the cold shadow of the earth to the hot sunlight.

    Heheh. When you get that all done, can you use SOAP to send the results over
    to my weblog? I figure all that should be worth a few thousand visits to my
    weblog at http://scoble.weblogs.com Heheh.

    PS: this post contains at least one thing that you +can+ do with .NET. You
    have to figure out that is for yourself.

    Robert



  6. #6
    Michael Culley Guest

    Re: .NET equals Efficiency

    > PS: this post contains at least one thing that you +can+ do with .NET.

    and a couple of plugs for your software

    --
    Michael Culley
    www.vbdotcom.com



  7. #7
    Bill Storage Guest

    Re: .NET equals Efficiency

    We've delivered 3 production apps using VB.NET in the last year. We have
    kept very detailed coder productivity records for the last few years. I'm
    seeing a factor of 2 to 3 improvement in coding time over VB6 and ASP.

    It may very well be true that it takes an absolute beginner longer to write
    Hello world than it did with VB6, but, as see by our experience, it takes
    quite a bit less time to do real work. It is very difficult to make money on
    Hello World. Most projects are large these days.

    I've never seen anything in my career that offered that degree of
    productivity improvement. But don't take it from me - keep listening to a
    bunch of newsgroup junkies.


    "Robert Scoble" <scoble@userland.com> wrote in message
    news:3c72e6ec$1@10.1.10.29...
    > > Coding in .NET is amazing. Everything is so fast and simple. By using

    > VB.NET
    > > I just wrote an algorithm to solve world hunger. That was never possible
    > > under VB6. My speech at the UN is next week.

    >
    > ****, all you did was solve world hunger? Geesh, with all the stuff in

    ..NET
    > you should have been able to also find a cure for cancer. And in your free
    > time you should have been able to have figured out what really happened

    when
    > the universe was created.





  8. #8
    W.E.(Bill) Goodrich, PhD Guest

    Re: .NET equals Efficiency

    In article <3c731919$1@10.1.10.29>,
    "Bill Storage" <storage@bplusmylastname.com> writes:

    > We've delivered 3 production apps using VB.NET in the last year.
    > We have kept very detailed coder productivity records for the last
    > few years.


    Does that include the "productivity" of the process of migrating them
    from their B2 CLR to the new CLR?

    > I'm seeing a factor of 2 to 3 improvement in coding time over VB6
    > and ASP.


    OTOH, I recently described a company I know that produced 200+
    shrink-wrap products over that same year using VB6 (and VC6). Three
    doesn't look like all that much.

    Do you think that it might have something to with the nature of your
    app rather than the number? That *some* apps may be more productive in
    VS6 than in .NET?


    --

    W.E. (Bill) Goodrich, PhD

    *-----------------------*--------------------------------------------*
    * CHANGE YOUR SEXUALITY * http://www.nyx.net/~bgoodric/ctg.html *
    * * *
    * Without Aversive * ctgcentral@earthlink.net *
    * Behavior Modification * Creative Technology Group *
    * or Drugs * PO Box 286 *
    * * Englewood, CO 80151-0286 *
    *-----------------------*--------------------------------------------*

  9. #9
    Michael Culley Guest

    Re: .NET equals Efficiency

    > OTOH, I recently described a company I know that produced 200+
    > shrink-wrap products over that same year using VB6 (and VC6). Three
    > doesn't look like all that much.


    The hole in the comparison is so huge that its almost not worth pointing
    out. But since you wrote this you obviously didn't see the hole. Actually,
    it is so obvious I don't think I'll bother.

    --
    Michael Culley
    www.vbdotcom.com


    "W.E.(Bill) Goodrich, PhD" <bgoodric@netzero.net> wrote in message
    news:3C732ADB.255B69B@netzero.net...
    > In article <3c731919$1@10.1.10.29>,
    > "Bill Storage" <storage@bplusmylastname.com> writes:
    >
    > > We've delivered 3 production apps using VB.NET in the last year.
    > > We have kept very detailed coder productivity records for the last
    > > few years.

    >
    > Does that include the "productivity" of the process of migrating them
    > from their B2 CLR to the new CLR?
    >
    > > I'm seeing a factor of 2 to 3 improvement in coding time over VB6
    > > and ASP.

    >
    > OTOH, I recently described a company I know that produced 200+
    > shrink-wrap products over that same year using VB6 (and VC6). Three
    > doesn't look like all that much.
    >
    > Do you think that it might have something to with the nature of your
    > app rather than the number? That *some* apps may be more productive in
    > VS6 than in .NET?
    >
    >
    > --
    >
    > W.E. (Bill) Goodrich, PhD
    >
    > *-----------------------*--------------------------------------------*
    > * CHANGE YOUR SEXUALITY * http://www.nyx.net/~bgoodric/ctg.html *
    > * * *
    > * Without Aversive * ctgcentral@earthlink.net *
    > * Behavior Modification * Creative Technology Group *
    > * or Drugs * PO Box 286 *
    > * * Englewood, CO 80151-0286 *
    > *-----------------------*--------------------------------------------*




  10. #10
    Bill Storage Guest

    Re: .NET equals Efficiency

    Hi Bill-

    "W.E.(Bill) Goodrich, PhD" <bgoodric@netzero.net> wrote in message
    news:3C732ADB.255B69B@netzero.net...

    > Does that include the "productivity" of the process of migrating them
    > from their B2 CLR to the new CLR?


    Well, the web app committed to running on B2 until its first rev, so
    migration wasn't an issue there.

    The 2 Winform apps migrated (B2-final) with no modification to the code. We
    didn't deploy them until after we had the final build, so it wasn't an issue
    there. Regardless, what is your point? My example dealt with productivity
    differences due to .NET features. How would migration pains from B2 to final
    be relevant to that issue?

    > > I'm seeing a factor of 2 to 3 improvement in coding time over VB6
    > > and ASP.

    >
    > OTOH, I recently described a company I know that produced 200+
    > shrink-wrap products over that same year using VB6 (and VC6). Three
    > doesn't look like all that much.


    Are you saying that my sample is too small, or that your pals write more
    code than mine? We wrote a lot of VB6 code too - hundreds of thousands of
    lines of it in one app alone last year, and have over a million users of
    another app. Our VB7 apps were similar to our VB6 apps, so I was comparing
    very similar projects built by the same people with two different dev
    products.

    >
    > Do you think that it might have something to with the nature of your
    > app rather than the number? That *some* apps may be more productive in
    > VS6 than in .NET?


    Undoubtedly it does, and undoubtedly there are. Very small apps are likely
    to be easier to build in VB6 than .NET. For example, VB7 requires that the
    coder understand the difference between a designer, a class, and an instance
    of the class for any app having more than one form. You still get the
    single-form auto-instantiation for free, but those who depended on it will
    have trouble when they attempt to display an instance of Form2 by calling
    Form2.Show.

    I don't think I've ever sold an Windows app that didn't really require
    understanding objects and instances. I'm absolutely sure I've never worked
    on a web project that didn't require that knowledge. I suspect that the
    majority of MS's dev product income is derived from companies with projects
    more like mine than like Hello World.

    BTW, our least experienced folks had very little difficulty grasping OOP
    principles and gaining productivity/reducing line count by their use. By far
    the biggest hurdle was adjusting to ADO.NET, which is obviously independent
    of the VB language. Oddly, people who never used ADO (old) often had less
    trouble than ADO veterans.

    Finally, our error rate (we track and categorized errors per line of code)
    was greatly reduced. So, world hunger being out of scope here, we really are
    finding .NET to be quite a big deal. I'm surprized at all the jaded cynicism
    around here. Be happy. Write some **** code.

    Bill Storage







  11. #11
    Kunle Odutola Guest

    Re: .NET equals Efficiency


    "Bill Storage" <storage@bplusmylastname.com> wrote in message
    news:3c734271@10.1.10.29...

    > Finally, our error rate (we track and categorized errors per line of code)
    > was greatly reduced. So, world hunger being out of scope here, we really

    are
    > finding .NET to be quite a big deal. I'm surprized at all the jaded

    cynicism
    > around here. Be happy. Write some **** code.


    What tools do you use for this?. Third-party or homegrown?

    Kunle



  12. #12
    Rob Teixeira Guest

    Re: .NET equals Efficiency


    Hi Bill,

    good to see you again

    "Bill Storage" <storage@bplusmylastname.com> wrote:
    >Hi Bill-
    >
    >"W.E.(Bill) Goodrich, PhD" <bgoodric@netzero.net> wrote in message
    >news:3C732ADB.255B69B@netzero.net...
    >
    >> Does that include the "productivity" of the process of migrating them
    >> from their B2 CLR to the new CLR?

    >
    >Well, the web app committed to running on B2 until its first rev, so
    >migration wasn't an issue there.
    >
    >The 2 Winform apps migrated (B2-final) with no modification to the code.

    We
    >didn't deploy them until after we had the final build, so it wasn't an issue
    >there. Regardless, what is your point? My example dealt with productivity
    >differences due to .NET features. How would migration pains from B2 to final
    >be relevant to that issue?


    Bill, give it up. The other Bill is a self-appointed authority on everything,
    despite never having actually read the documentation thoroughly or tested
    the product. You're wasting your breath with this one.

    >BTW, our least experienced folks had very little difficulty grasping OOP
    >principles and gaining productivity/reducing line count by their use.


    Same here. In fact, everyone was pretty happy about the OOP capabilities.
    Even the newbies in the group were pointing out how well-organized the code
    was. We also had a few mid-level programmers who were dipping into Java that
    said they finally had respect for VB as a language, and quickly started to
    favor it over Java.

    >By far
    >the biggest hurdle was adjusting to ADO.NET, which is obviously independent
    >of the VB language. Oddly, people who never used ADO (old) often had less
    >trouble than ADO veterans.


    Yeah, that sounds about right. It was easier for us because we used stored
    procedures almost exclusively, and once everyone figured out how to call
    them and deal with the datasets, there wasn't much fuss at all. I'd say that
    it took a good four days to get comfy with ADO.NET, but it didn't seem like
    much of a hurdle at all.

    >Finally, our error rate (we track and categorized errors per line of code)
    >was greatly reduced.


    Very true. I've seen the same thing. I think the new IDE should probably
    take a lot of credit for that. The tools are incredible at producing good
    quality code, even without E&C or a design-time immediate window (although,
    i did cheat and made my own design-time immediate window!)

    >So, world hunger being out of scope here, we really are
    >finding .NET to be quite a big deal. I'm surprized at all the jaded cynicism
    >around here.


    Doesn't surprise me at all. Major change will do that. I know because I felt
    disappointed in VB.NET in November of 1999 when i finally decided to get
    a hold of it. It took me three months of solid testing before I became convinced
    that .NET was definitely the way to go. I have to say that the last year
    using the various beta versions has been an absolute joy to work with. As
    of two weeks ago, I'm back in VB6 to do some maintenance in a client's app,
    and I'm absolutely cringing at how primative it seems now

    >Be happy. Write some **** code.


    Funny how many *programmers* prefer to ***** over write code. Over 12 months
    later, they are still whining and have yet to write one line.

    -Rob

  13. #13
    Bob Guest

    Re: .NET equals Efficiency

    In article <3c73bd25$1@10.1.10.29>, "Rob Teixeira" <RobTeixeira@@msn.com>
    says...
    >
    > Hi Bill,
    >
    > good to see you again
    >

    Rob,

    Yeah, especially after the .notters blamed him for single-handedly causing
    the demise of VB6.

    Bob

  14. #14
    Robert Lantry Guest

    Re: .NET equals Efficiency


    "W.E.(Bill) Goodrich, PhD" <bgoodric@netzero.net> wrote:
    >In article <3c731919$1@10.1.10.29>,
    >"Bill Storage" <storage@bplusmylastname.com> writes:
    >
    >> We've delivered 3 production apps using VB.NET in the last year.
    >> We have kept very detailed coder productivity records for the last
    >> few years.

    >
    >Does that include the "productivity" of the process of migrating them
    >from their B2 CLR to the new CLR?
    >
    >> I'm seeing a factor of 2 to 3 improvement in coding time over VB6
    >> and ASP.

    >
    >OTOH, I recently described a company I know that produced 200+
    >shrink-wrap products over that same year using VB6 (and VC6). Three
    >doesn't look like all that much.
    >
    >Do you think that it might have something to with the nature of your
    >app rather than the number? That *some* apps may be more productive in
    >VS6 than in .NET?


    Yes, as previously stated, Hello World is much faster in VB6. Oh. Wait,
    no it's not. The fact that I can write a Hello world as a WinForm, WebForm,
    Console App, user control, Web Control or Web Service clearly defines .NET
    as "more productive."



  15. #15
    Karl E. Peterson Guest

    Re: .NET equals Efficiency

    "Bob" <no@spam.com> wrote in message news:MPG.16dd7f8d41f7c235989693@news.devx.com...
    > In article <3c73bd25$1@10.1.10.29>, "Rob Teixeira" <RobTeixeira@@msn.com>
    > says...
    > >
    > > Hi Bill,
    > >
    > > good to see you again
    > >

    > Rob,
    >
    > Yeah, especially after the .notters blamed him for single-handedly causing
    > the demise of VB6.


    I think he was simply quoted as taking credit for that. If you feel otherwise, can
    you provide a cite?
    --
    [Microsoft Basic: 1976-2001, RIP]


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