|
There's little to fix.  The problem I think, is backward compatibility. I mean, I suppose they could rewrite the CodeDOM in a new System assembly but I think they'd be more likely to retire it, if anything.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
I like the CodeDOM and use it a lot, since it is built in.
Exception up = new Exception("Something is really wrong.");
throw up;
|
|
|
|
|
I use it quite a bit myself. At the risk of advertising here you might be interested in my project:
CodeDOM Go Kit: The CodeDOM is Dead, Long Live the CodeDOM[^]
It's quite powerful. It even allows you to parse a C# subset into the CodeDOM so you can construct CodeDOM graphs using C# code, which saves a lot of typing. It allows you to query a CodeDOM tree, and even can perform complex operations on CodeDOM trees like reflection and method selection.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
I'm still waiting for, "the framework which is to come after .net" .
|
|
|
|
|
.net++
That'd be .neu (new in German)!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mehdi Gholam wrote: Hopefully it will be all fixed in .net5! 
.net core is opensource. Feel free to do MS's job for them (because we all know they won't ) and submit a PR.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
I've heard that .Net is largely inspired by Java.
If the first version of .Net did not have generics, then perhaps Java also did not have generics at that time. How is Java managing its deprecation of features?
|
|
|
|
|
Amarnath S wrote: How is Java managing its deprecation of features?
Java isn't a thing anyone should emulate.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
IIRC, Java generics are fundamentally different than .NET ones because they use type erasure, whereas .NET creates specialised variants of generic interfaces. This does give Java more backward compatibility than C#
Java, Basic, who cares - it's all a bunch of tree-hugging hippy cr*p
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As I recall, .NET got generics somewhat before Java. (More than a year? I don't recall exactly).
|
|
|
|
|
honey the codewitch wrote: Microsoft didn't put generics into 1.x I think because of time constraints, and if so they should have waited, IMO.
.net was so radically different with so many improvements, the fact that generics wasn't included was pretty irrelevant. To put things into perspective, .net 1 shipped with email classes that were just an interop wrapper to the CDONTS COM object. If there was no native support for things as fundamental as email, is it any wonder there were no generics?
For things like List<T> we just used CollectionBase. There's no major need to programatically determine the underlying collection type...back then or now, it's a fringe requirements that might be important to you, but not the masses, and delaying the rollout of .net for something no-one really needs would not be a good idea.
|
|
|
|
|
honey the codewitch wrote: Microsoft didn't put generics into 1.x I think because of time constraints, and if so they should have waited, IMO.
IIRC they couldn't wait because they'd lost the lawsuit with Sun over J++; and needed to get a nominal replacement stack out asap.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
Oh yeah - i worked there during that mess.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
At MS or at Sun? Either way, do you have any stories to share from the inside?
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry, I was at Microsoft. For the record, I was glad Sun was suing over Java, and I'm glad MS dropped Visual J++ because it was garbage.
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Wow, whining about something that was given away for free. Remember, you have never needed Visual Studio to compile a dotNet project. VS just made it easier.
|
|
|
|
|
I never said otherwise. Why are you even responding?
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
Can you pass a scuba diving course even if all your grades are below C level?
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
It would appear that you're still sick.
Get well soon!
|
|
|
|
|
Only if something fishy is going on... 
Anything that is unrelated to elephants is irrelephant
Anonymous
-
The problem with quotes on the internet is that you can never tell if they're genuine
Winston Churchill, 1944
-
Never argue with a fool. Onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.
Mark Twain
|
|
|
|
|
you suggesting he bends the rules?
pestilence [ pes-tl-uh ns ] noun
1. a deadly or virulent epidemic disease. especially bubonic plague.
2. something that is considered harmful, destructive, or evil.
Synonyms: pest, plague, CCP
|
|
|
|
|
Water you talking about? I know posting ToD's is a tankless job, but it swimiscale nature lends itself thereto.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
