|
Articles written with VS 2008 are worth posting. VS 2010, 2012 and 2013 offer a compliant converting mechanism.
Veni, vidi, caecus | Everything summarizes to Assembly code
|
|
|
|
|
Answering your QUESTION, I would definitely read an article for software written in VS2008, or even 2005.
If you want to use the CODE, it should be easy to port as all previous versions of .NET will be compatible.
People who worry about upgrading projects are obviously lazy or they can't programme for toffee.
People who are telling you which version to upgrade to cannot read. 
Me? I'm thinking of submitting an article written in .Net 4(Mono/VS) about a tiny encryption pad I wrote for sport a few years ago. It will be bare code and people can make it compatible with whatever.
|
|
|
|
|
I still use 2008 mostly because it works for what I need and is compatible with Windows XP and up. The fact that I can't justify the expense to the management for an upgrade 'it works, why change it?' attitude (I'm the only one in the company who does Windows programming). The chances are the bit you reference hasn't had changes or the interface hasn't changed. I for one haven't had to use a database in anger, but it's looking like I might have to soon. Go For It  
|
|
|
|
|
Go ahead.
It's not like the same principles will suddenly not apply.
My company was still using VS 2008 for the project I work on until a few months ago.
|
|
|
|
|
All of my articles were written using a development environment that included only VS2008. I find nothing in later versions of VS that I cannot program in VS2008. Also, writing an article in the later VS versions effectively limits your article's audience. Although it is possible to convert down to VS2008, why ask a reader to do so?
VS2008 is my choice.
Gus Gustafson
|
|
|
|
|
|
No, I don't think it's outdated at all. It's a solid platform. I've standardized all my development on it with attendant tools and I, too, find the idea of "upgrading" unpalatable. I write to the desktop and have a massive library I've developed over the years there's no reason, at all, to consider an upgrade. My code runs on everything from XP to Windows 8 desktop with no issues. Upgrading would be a colossal waste of money.
IMHO, just hunker down and stick with it unless you find something you REALLY need to do but is only offered in later versions. I can see you're doing similar work with your database toolkit. I've done same. Why retool and/or re-invent the wheel at this stage?
Write your article. I suspect there are many people that would use it. Besides, as someone else has already said: if you're using a later version the techniques won't change.
|
|
|
|
|
I'd suggest - yes. Your articles should not be unworthy just because they're in Vs2008. Many (but not all) projects seem to load into later versions of Visual Studio without any problem. In fact, in a way it makes more sense, as I get responses to my Vs2012 projects like "can you please provide a Vs2008 version?" It's easier to go up a version than it is to go down.
James Hurst
"The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated."
Mahatma Gandhi
|
|
|
|
|
|
You maybe think the world is great and the future is bright.
Back in 1984, when I was 17, the world was a different place.
The Soviets still were the dominant force of fear in the West and nuclear war was still a thing to be feared.
But we got on with it and struggled through a world recession, strikes, appalling bad fashion and strikingly brilliant music.
Then THIS[^] came out and frightened the bejabers out of us.
It is still quite harrowing, but if you have nearly two hours to kill and do not want to be cheered up at all, watch it and think what it did for people 30 years ago.
---------------------------------
Obscurum per obscurius.
Ad astra per alas porci.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur .
|
|
|
|
|
I watched that again quite recently and it still scared the breakfast out of me. It was way more realistic than anything from Hollywood and was doubly frightening when I first saw it as it seemed not only possible but probable!
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
It was good because it was concerned with normal people and their inability to do anything about what was happening.
Hollywood would have had car chases and President's saving the day.
I think it was actually banned in some places in the States because they felt it would frighten people.
(By frighten I mean force them to march on Washington and shoot politicians).
---------------------------------
Obscurum per obscurius.
Ad astra per alas porci.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur .
|
|
|
|
|
Dalek Dave wrote: I think it was actually banned in some places in the States because they felt it would frighten people.
This had better be true. The Law of Irony demands it.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: march on Washington and shoot politicians
...and this is a problem because?
- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.
|
|
|
|
|
It was a problem for the politicians!
---------------------------------
Obscurum per obscurius.
Ad astra per alas porci.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur .
|
|
|
|
|
1984 was aweful! Not only did it see the end of Rentaghost but The Young Ones as well. 
speramus in juniperus
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, but Big Brother was not in power (like he is now, bless Ch. 4 ((was it going then??)))
|
|
|
|
|
From your description, the world has changed very little.
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
Music Sucks!
---------------------------------
Obscurum per obscurius.
Ad astra per alas porci.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur .
|
|
|
|
|
Unlike 1984[^] when we had Black Lace, Neil [Young Ones again], Joe Fagin and Ray Parker Jr? Sorry, but there was more depth to the pop scene back then and there was some good music [even U2 were good and Bono wasn't yet a REDACTED], but there was still a council estate's worth of dog-doo-doo.
speramus in juniperus
|
|
|
|
|
Nagy Vilmos wrote: a council estate's worth of dog-doo-doo
I believe the technical term for this is "a Luton".
Never underestimate the power of stupid things in large numbers
--- Serious Sam
|
|
|
|
|
To, the 80's were a continuation of the downward march of music that more-or-less began with disco.
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "As far as we know, our computer has never had an undetected error." - Weisert | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
How about this for an IMDB biography for one of the actors[^]? She must have been so proud of her performance that she immediately retired!
=========================================================
I'm an optoholic - my glass is always half full of vodka.
=========================================================
|
|
|
|
|
Lol
There were a lot of locals who were not actors given parts in it.
I will say that having visited Sheffield I am surprised the film-makers did not restore the city after turning the place into a scene of post-apocalyptic desolation.
---------------------------------
Obscurum per obscurius.
Ad astra per alas porci.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur .
|
|
|
|
|
Dalek Dave wrote: Back in 1984, when I was 17,
Who're you calling "young"? 
/ravi
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
