Re: Visual Basic.net
- From: fajp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Frank Adam)
- Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2005 14:17:17 +1000
On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 22:18:37 -0500, Tom Shelton
<tshelton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> By the way, which specific API calls did you manage to remove? Will it, for
>
>For that particular application, the ones that stand out the most were
>the FindFirstChangeNotify and friends. It had a section of code that
>was written to watch for creation of certian files (fax images
>actually). This whole section of code was easily replaced using the
>FileSystemWatcher component in System.IO. I believe there were a couple
>of others, but I can't remember precisely which ones.
>
Yes Tom, but you know as well as all of us, that including objects
such as the FileSystemWatcher will carry quite an overhead. It doesn't
matter how we pretty it up, multi purpose objects will always have
quite a bit of extra code, apart form the idiot proofing. Code, which
if the feature is written clean for the application's purpose will not
be in the final distribution.
Admittedly the object in question is proabably rather a light weight
one, but in general this is what irks me about all that's RAD. It is
great for productivity, but frankly as a programmer what do you want
to be remembered for ? Being the best coder, or being the best object
user ?
RAD makes us lazy, it deludes the mind and programmers end up
expecting to have an object for everything. And we have that now,
called .Net.
Even with VB6 this was already a probem, the number of posts i saw
compaining about a control not working just right, not having a
certain desired functionality, or lacking a property is bewildering.
The usual "subclass ? How do i do that ??" is even more annoying.
..Net is the answer to all the whingers, who expected to have
everything put in their little hands. Now we have the other side of
the horse, where there is so many objects and properties for each,
that programming knowledge is no longer the issue. The issue is about
how and where the hell will i find the right class to use for a
specific purpose ? We've gone from a single screw together Lego set to
a thousand boxes of snapon add-ons.
>You may very well have to call API's for that - I'm not at all saying
>that you never have to in .NET, just that the number calls needed has been
>significantly reduced.
>
Wrapped into and/or replaced by bloat, you mean ?
I should mention that i don't mind .Net, but i don't like what it's
done to what used to be a brain game. Putting shaped blocks into
various holes should remain a psychiatrist's toy.
--
Regards, Frank
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Visual Basic.net
- From: Tom Shelton
- Re: Visual Basic.net
- References:
- Re: Visual Basic.net
- From: Tom Shelton
- Re: Visual Basic.net
- From: Mike Williams
- Re: Visual Basic.net
- From: Tom Shelton
- Re: Visual Basic.net
- Prev by Date: Re: Visual Basic.net
- Next by Date: Re: Visual Basic.net
- Previous by thread: Re: Visual Basic.net
- Next by thread: Re: Visual Basic.net
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|