|
Stable Genius wrote: I don't know about windows, I work on iOS and Android apps, but one day out of sheer curiosity, I have tried to replicate an HTML5/CSS3/JavaScript(with addons) UI with native elements. Result: disaster, the HTML5/CSS3/Javascript combination happens to be the best and fastest UI platform.
iOS and Android apps are not as fully baked as UWP is. Neither uses XAML (unless you are using Xamarin Forms) and that's a BIG disadvantage for them. The AXML paradigm for Android is horrible. XAML is much more natural for web developers. The biggest hurdle is wrapping your brain around styling with XAML, but once you get it, CSS sucks.
Now, if someone doesn't WANT to learn a typed language such as C# or C++, then that's not a fault of the platform, but of the developer. Personally, I HATE Javascript development, but I do it when I have to.
|
|
|
|
|
We are a dying breed. I have been a Desktop Programmer since 1978. Most Guys like me are settled and have found our own niche (Wives, children, grandchildren, homes, mortgages, favorite bars, etc.)
"Developer" is the term du Jour, to guys like me. Don't use it.
Also, consider allowing a candidate to work remotely. Even then expect to pay more, we know how "rare" we are becoming. Supply and Demand - Adam Smith had it right, it's not just a theory, it's a fact. I get contacted by "head hunters" two to three times a week.
I am currently upgrading my package from VB6 to C#, so my current clients have a fighting chance of finding someone to maintain my code after I am gone. Yes, I do expect my software to outlive me. 
It's a random chance Universe and we are all out there riding waves of Probability.
"Newer" is NOT automatically better, only Different. (And more complex and bug ridden when it comes to all of the "boutique" languages / frameworks out there)
|
|
|
|
|
Windows Desktop
Universal Windows Platform
Xamarin
You're looking for a mobile developer on two platforms who also knows the Win32/64 API. You're looking for three different detailed skill sets.
|
|
|
|
|
Did you not see the word "OR"?
|
|
|
|
|
I've been saying that's where the money is ... but they laughed.
One platform; multiple devices.
(It actually works).
"(I) am amazed to see myself here rather than there ... now rather than then".
― Blaise Pascal
|
|
|
|
|
I'd be someone that would be "close" to hitting the reqs, in that I can develop WinForms C#, but alas I had decided a while back to stop chasing all of Micro$oft's API updates. Perhaps a lot of other Windows hackers like Yours Truly have decided the same. I do know that in the good old days, I did not have to have "paid experience" in every single requirement to get a gig; as long as I had the main one, the client would let me learn what I needed to on the job. But clients have gotten used to not having to do that anymore, so I have "early retired".
|
|
|
|
|
I'm curious as to what ORM you use and why.
For personal projects I use Linq to SQL and I love it. It's simple and works all the time. At work we're using Entity Framework and I detest it. It ALWAYS results in compilation errors and almost always generates entities wrong in some way.
I'v heard of some folks here using their home rolled ORM's. For those of you, what ORM would yo say it most resembles?
If it's not broken, fix it until it is.
Everything makes sense in someone's mind.
Ya can't fix stupid.
modified 12-Apr-18 12:40pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Linq2SQL. And yes, my experiences with EF are similar. What's worse though is that a lot of the time, an ORM isn't necessary. Take a server-side query that is converted to JSON for displaying data on the client-side browser. Why go through an ORM? Yet I see people using EF to load the query into a model, then serialize the model into JSON, then return it to the client. Why go through that extra step?
Or similarly, on a thick client, it's easy enough to data bind directly to a DataTable, even if it's only one row where you want to display the data in discrete fields rather than a grid, and you can wire up the events to track changes and persist the data for a responsive UI with little effort.
|
|
|
|
|
I agree.
But I find models useful when you need things like property change notification. They're also useful for representing a single data item. Passing a while DataTable around works but seems rather bulky to me.
Probably 6 one way, half dozen the other.
Thanks
If it's not broken, fix it until it is.
Everything makes sense in someone's mind.
Ya can't fix stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
Right, I haven't yet encountered a database access situation that couldn't easily be dealt with by using DataReaders, DataTables, DataViews, DataRows, etc.
Microsoft even provides DataAdapters (ptui) for Bob's sake!
ORMs are definitely a solution looking for a problem.
|
|
|
|
|
But wait... it's a shiny new UI tool with cool graphics... so we NEED it.
If it's not broken, fix it until it is.
Everything makes sense in someone's mind.
Ya can't fix stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
The reason we have ORMs now is because we can't use FPSE to connect our ASP pages to their MSAccess databases
Director of Transmogrification Services
Shinobi of Query Language
Master of Yoda Conditional
|
|
|
|
|
Were I to use one it would be one I created.
Third choice would be one from Microsoft, never from a third-party.
modified 12-Apr-18 13:25pm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kevin Marois wrote: I'm curious as to what ORM you use and why.
I'm curious as to why you are curious
|
|
|
|
|
Like I said, I really like Linq to Sql, but it's an older technology. Got me thinking about what ppl are using these days.
If it's not broken, fix it until it is.
Everything makes sense in someone's mind.
Ya can't fix stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
Just beginning with NHibernate, at first I was very skeptical, but now I am a bit milder. It was not my choice of course but imposed by management. Clearly this is not an ORM to use if you are in a hurry due to it's complexity ...
|
|
|
|
|
RickZeeland wrote: Clearly this is not an ORM to use if you are in a hurry due to it's complexity
Kind of contradicting the purpose, isn't it?
|
|
|
|
|
I have to agree, an ORM should make things easier for developers, but on the positive side it can make things easier once you understand how it works, a pity the learning curve is so damn steep 
|
|
|
|
|
RickZeeland wrote: an ORM should make things easier for developers
RickZeeland wrote: pity the learning curve is so damn steep
|
|
|
|
|
contradictio in terminis, haha 
|
|
|
|
|
Linq2SQLalso, because as you say it just works.
I also hate EF, it's a complicated POS and if you want to do anything out of the, what they obviously consider normal, you will have bend nails with your teeth to get it to work.
Everyone has a photographic memory; some just don't have film. Steven Wright
|
|
|
|
|
Yupper.
One thing I hate... We generate entities into another project in the solution, and the whole shebang is under source control.
So if you first don't check out ALL the entities in the generation location, it fails to generate with read only errors. So what we've all done is select all in Windows Explorer and make everything read-write.
If it's not broken, fix it until it is.
Everything makes sense in someone's mind.
Ya can't fix stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
EF for CRUD. (Not by my choice though)
Everything else is homegrown.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
