03-04-2003 04:45									#31
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Agathon: a lot of companies operate that way. They do that to increase worker production in to make their nutrition rate seem lower than it really is. Common practice... generally, contractors do not leave unless they get greedy, then, when their contract is up, they can leave without any reperations.

	03-04-2003 04:46									#32
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Agathon These guys were programmers.

Programmers (codemonkeys) or software engineers?

	03-04-2003 04:47									#33
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Japher Agathon: a lot of companies operate that way. They do that to increase worker production in to make their nutrition rate seem lower than it really is. Common practice... generally, contractors do not leave unless they get greedy, then, when their contract is up, they can leave without any reperations.

Yeah I know. I'm not picking on MS over this, but Asher is looking for a job there. I'm quick prepared to pick on the evil empire for its other misdeeds though.

	03-04-2003 04:49									#34
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Agathon Yeah I know. I'm not picking on MS over this, but Asher is looking for a job there. I'm quick prepared to pick on the evil empire for its other misdeeds though.

I'm not specifically looking for a job at MS.

They just pay really well, have great benefits, and happen to be one of the largest employers.

I'd be just as happy working for a smalltime company.

	03-04-2003 04:51									#35
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Oh... yeah, temp-to-hire and permatemps is one way to go. I know contractors here, where I work, that have been here for over a decade and would never join the company. The build up the companies dependency on them and then bagger/blackmale their bosses for raises... Two different worlds, same crappy job.

	03-04-2003 04:53									#36
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Asher Programmers (codemonkeys) or software engineers?

Don't know.

You're asking me to remember word for word something I read about 2 years ago. I do know that there was a court case in the early 90s. Anyway, I'm sure you are smart enough to know if you are getting shafted.

	03-04-2003 05:26									#37
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Asher Here's a short summary of C# vs Java: http://www.networkmagazineindia.com...1/workshop1.htm

I think that person was C programmer and didn't do lots of programming in Java. I don't think that more OO than another is argument. Java has clearer syntax so you could cooperate with people with different experience, and YOU COULD DO code maintenance even after few years.

quote: 2 * TWO is converted to 2 * 2 by the preprocessor before compilation. This causes the compiled program to run faster as it does not have to look up the value of the constant during run-time.

This is in Java too. Java has preprocesor, it is just nonaccesible for programmer. This is nice thing.

Java jump statements are continue and break. return is for methods and goto isn't in Java now.

quote: class D : B, C

This is really messy. Compare it with. D extends B implements C {}

quote: each class needs to exist in a like-named file (with the like-named extension .java) there are exceptions with class visible and inner classes, as those are defined within another class's .java file.

I did some program. I compiled one source file and get 4 classes. Yes I had 2 inner classes, but there is no direct restriction for amount of ordinary classes in one source file. There is just rule that pulblic class shoud be declared in file with same name.

	03-04-2003 05:35									#38
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by raghar This is in Java too. Java has preprocesor, it is just nonaccesible for programmer. This is nice thing.

Having it as both is nicer.
If you have no need for it, you don't use it.
If you do, go for it...

quote: I did some program. I compiled one source file and get 4 classes. Yes I had 2 inner classes, but there is no direct restriction for amount of ordinary classes in one source file. There is just rule that pulblic class shoud be declared in file with same name.

That's all it was saying.

I've always found it to be an incredibly annoying restriction, but I learned on C++.

	03-04-2003 05:53									#39
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Class A and Class B could be in file A.java with no problem.

If you need public Class A and public Class B then you could write simple "diffuser"

	03-04-2003 07:54									#40
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Good riddance.

Java is the biggest resource hog EVER

	03-04-2003 15:07									#41
	Increase Your PM Length

ISO certification don't mean squat. Besides, it is not yet certified. Come back when it's the case.


Case closed.

	03-04-2003 16:50									#42
	Put an end to popups!

Geee, was it necessary to resurrect this thread?

raghar, can you tell me where this quote comes from (you used it):

quote: 2 * TWO is converted to 2 * 2 by the preprocessor before compilation. This causes the compiled program to run faster as it does not have to look up the value of the constant during run-time.

I ask, because it's utter nonsense. Any optimizing compiler using an explicit or implicit preprocessor (that's practically all I used in the past 10 years) wouldn't compile this like "2*2", but precompute 4 and load it in the appropriate register. For the i386 architecture, this would be for instance "mov eax, 4" and that's it. It makes absolutely no difference whether the code is "TWO * 2" or "2 * 2". "To lookup a constant" is crap, because it's, well, a constant, and can be used as immediate value. Otherwise it would be a variable.

Anyway, C# is a good thing and I will gladly use it, when one more condition is met:

	03-04-2003 23:03									#43
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Urban Ranger ISO certification don't mean squat. Besides, it is not yet certified. Come back when it's the case. Case closed.

It's in the formalization process and is going to be announced as a full ISO standard in a couple weeks.

And I would disagree that ISO certification doesn't mean squat. It means the people pissed off about MS possibly changing things on them to make their implementations incompatible now have to put up and shut up...

	03-04-2003 23:06									#44
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Sir Ralph:



I'd like everyone to note that in this very thread, I said:

quote: Not to mention that most Unix developers are so anti-Microsoft that they would probably refuse to use a Microsoft technology even if it was significantly better and more open than Sun's technology.

And then Sir Ralph just came and said:

quote: Anyway, C# is a good thing and I will gladly use it, when one more condition is met: (when hell freezes over)

Some people need to drop their "religion" and realize when some software is better than another, and use the appropriate one.

	04-04-2003 02:01									#45
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Sir Ralph Geee, was it necessary to resurrect this thread? raghar, can you tell me where this quote comes from (you used it):

I used Asher's link http://www.networkmagazineindia.com...1/workshop1.htm
Well I didn't see so much simplification and errors in long time ( with exception of Pentagon's briefings).

I look forward to this http://www.intel.com/technology/itj...01_abstract.htm
It looks interesting. Intel has much more resources than Sun.

	04-04-2003 02:28									#46
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Funny link. Gave me some good giggles. Oh Sancta Simplicita.

Asher, I'm not a UNIX developer, I write (among other stuff) portable libraries and am familiar with both worlds. If it doesn't come to GUI stuff, that is. And this post I write on WinXP using IE6, so far for being religious. C# still stinks. And before you protest: Java stinks too. They are both resource wasting crap.

	04-04-2003 02:44									#47
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Asher And I would disagree that ISO certification doesn't mean squat. It means the people pissed off about MS possibly changing things on them to make their implementations incompatible now have to put up and shut up...

The certification only covers C# and the CLI. When all the API's, libraries etc that .Net consists of is submitted to a standard organization and certified, then we have something to talk about. As of now only a small part of the environment is open. Seems more like PR bullshit than anything else...

	04-04-2003 02:54									#48
	Got spare money?

You sinners! Submit to Perl!

I don't know either Java or C#, but anything's fine by me.

Tim Toady

	04-04-2003 03:25									#49
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Yog-Sothoth The certification only covers C# and the CLI. When all the API's, libraries etc that .Net consists of is submitted to a standard organization and certified, then we have something to talk about. As of now only a small part of the environment is open. Seems more like PR bullshit than anything else...

Exactly.

	04-04-2003 05:18									#50
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Sir Ralph C# still stinks. And before you protest: Java stinks too. They are both resource wasting crap.

Did you forget that C# acts like C++++ when you tell it to just compile like a normal program?

	04-04-2003 05:20									#51
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Yog-Sothoth The certification only covers C# and the CLI. When all the API's, libraries etc that .Net consists of is submitted to a standard organization and certified, then we have something to talk about. As of now only a small part of the environment is open. Seems more like PR bullshit than anything else...

Nonsense, I don't think you understand how the CLI works in C#.

I've heard this argument profusely on Slashdot, too, and it gets modded up by people who also don't know what they're talking about.

The .NET API is built into the C# CLI. The CLI parses the API. It's not just a code interpreter like you seem to be under the impression of it being, it's an environment which contains both the libraries, APIs, and the interpreter.

Under this ISO flag, the libraries, its APIs, and the actual interpreter itself are ISO standards.

I'll put it this way: C# code doesn't compile in all of the libraries when you compile a code. Those libraries exist pre-compiled in the CLI environment, and all the code does is call them remotely as an object. Those objects and libraries (and correspondingly, the APIs) are a critical component of the CLIs and are covered under the ISO standard.

Now, of course it's possible for someone to make their own library and use it, but it wouldn't be an ISO standard then, and MS is using their own libraries which are included in the CLI.

	04-04-2003 07:22									#52
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Asher And I would disagree that ISO certification doesn't mean squat. It means the people pissed off about MS possibly changing things on them to make their implementations incompatible now have to put up and shut up...

It doesn't matter. MS can still make changes to make new versions incompatible with the old, and call it C## or some such. It doesn't make a bit of difference. The whole thing is the controls are still in the hands of MS, not ISO.

If MS turns over the process to a standards body such as IEEE or ANSI, that's a different story altogether.

	04-04-2003 07:24									#53
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Urban Ranger It doesn't matter. MS can still make changes to make new versions incompatible with the old, and call it C## or some such. It doesn't make a bit of difference. The whole thing is the controls are still in the hands of MS, not ISO.

How does THAT matter, even IF they do it?

For their old programs to work, it'd need to be backwards compatible. I don't see why people couldn't just keep doing the "ISO" C# in the first place.

	04-04-2003 09:23									#54
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Sir Ralph They are both resource wasting crap.

That's what I thought about anything that wasn't
human coded assembler or poked code.

Damn loonies keep writing new languages, after I
told them it was a waste of time.

As for ISO, i'll paid attention to it WHEN americans stop using MM/DD/YY.

	04-04-2003 09:25									#55
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Ozz That's what I thought about anything that wasn't human coded assembler or poked code. Damn loonies keep writing new languages, after I told them it was a waste of time.

That's a very valid point.

At one point, C was "resource wasting crap".
Then it was C++.
And now it's Java/C#.

Let's face it, as languages become more advanced and powerful they use more resources. Thankfully hardware is plenty fast enough now for Java/C# type applications.

You can even write fast 3D engines in C#, provided you have it set in JIT mode or pre-compiled a-la standard C/C++.

	04-04-2003 09:36									#56
	Support Apolyton

I am actively writing applications at work using C#, (along with VFP 7, VB.NET, and tSQL). We are using both VFP 7 and C# with their respective Mere Mortals Framework (By Oak Leaf).

There are a few things about C# I don't like, and it still needs to grow up a bit, but all in all it is a very powerful language.

	04-04-2003 12:03									#57
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Asher Did you forget that C# acts like C++++ when you tell it to just compile like a normal program?

C++++... You mean with yet more overhead and tenfold more runtime libraries, making it able to run a "Hello World" program with only one installation CD?

Btw, as far as I remember (that's over 20 years of computer programming), C was never resource wasting crap. Au contraire, the original language is beautiful lean.

	04-04-2003 12:53									#58
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Asher Nonsense, I don't think you understand how the CLI works in C#. I've heard this argument profusely on Slashdot, too, and it gets modded up by people who also don't know what they're talking about. The .NET API is built into the C# CLI. The CLI parses the API. It's not just a code interpreter like you seem to be under the impression of it being, it's an environment which contains both the libraries, APIs, and the interpreter. Under this ISO flag, the libraries, its APIs, and the actual interpreter itself are ISO standards.

The .NET API is not build into the C# CLI. The .NET Framework Components are:

- ASP .NET: Web Forms & Services
- User Interface (System.WIndows.Forms, etc)
- ADO .NET: Data & XML
- .NET Framework CLass Library
- Common Language Runtime

And as I understand it, the ISO standard will only cover the CLR (and C#).

Edit: read the damn thing wrong, its in fact the CLI that is submitted.

Y-S

	04-04-2003 13:02									#59
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Yog-Sothoth The .NET API is not build into the C# CLI. The .NET Framework Components are: - ASP .NET: Web Forms & Services - User Interface (System.WIndows.Forms, etc) - ADO .NET: Data & XML - .NET Framework CLass Library - Common Language Runtime And as I understand it, the ISO standard will only cover the CLI (and C#). Y-S

The CLI includes what's in your list.

I think you're confusing CLI with CLR.

	04-04-2003 13:04									#60
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

CLI = Common Language Infrastructure (infrastructure being the key word)
CLR = Common Language Runtime (the VM itself)