Re: Visual Basic.net

On Sun, 24 Jul 2005 00:48:34 -0500, Tom Shelton
<tshelton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>> Aduh, where is the surprise ? Talk about cramming it all down our
>> throats. As i've said, welcome to Lego programming.
>> Programmers from now on will not be classed on logical ability, but on
>> memory retention.
>> "Can you remember all the class trees ? Then you're a *great*
>> programmer and here is your bonus." See anything wrong with that ?
>
>Simply not true. I'm sorry, but all the class in the runtime do is
>encapsulate a bunch of common functionality. They let you get on with
>
So are you saying they are just wrapper classes, with absolutely no
added error trapping, no overhead, extra flavouring, or water added ?
Nothing that wouldn't be there if the API was accessed directly ? I
very much doubt that, Tom.
I have written a number of wrapper classes myself and never did i even
imagine that having done so is not only for making life easier for me,
at the cost of adding overhead.
If said wrapper or DLL was to be written for multi-use, the amount of
code would increase as various traps and other filters are added to
make sure it's not the DLL that will crash, but rather, if possible,
catch and delegate the error back to the caller in a safe fashion.
This is the duty of a good DLL.
At this stage it doesn't matter, whether the caller will only use one
function out of the DLL, the whole DLL still loads into memory.

>the job of solving the problem at hand, without worrying about writting
>an XML parser. Look, I wrote a predictive dialer application in C# (it
>is used in Collections, not telemarketing by the way) - the framework
>didn't do anything to help me come up with algorithms to give the dialer
>the ability to allocate line resources dynamically. I had to come up
>with that.
>
Algos are simply thought processes. It is just thinking up how a
process should take place. Without that there would be no life as we
know it, since getting through a closed door would be impossible..
That is not what i've meant by being dumbed down.
I agree with one of your previous statements, that you can do a lot
more with .Net a lot quicker, but this needs little programming
proess, it simply requires that you understand and know all the
myriads of library functions. Not unlike some helpdesks, where the so
called "experts" are reading off a cue ***, but if you ask them
anything that is not on the sheets, they just hum and ahm...
And IMHO, this is where .Net is leading the industry. Nice and
"managed" sheep is what MS wants you to be today..

--

Regards, Frank
.

Quantcast