Discussions

geez I feel like geezer reading these. 

Trying to remember first contact with Microsoft  software.   But it was with the Trs 80, Altair, and IBM PC, might even have the Old PC dos books for DOS 1.01. 

Douglas

Egads never wanted to see a 8 in floppy again in my life.  thanks for the Memory:)

I have been looking at the MVVM with rx integrated.  UI in general is Async, in that it is a STM be it GDI or WPF.  It is also highly event based so it makes sense, at least for me) that RX would be a good glue to allow compostion. 

The one I am looking at is http://blog.paulbetts.org/index.php/2010/06/15/reactivexaml-a-compelling-combination-of-mvvm-and-reactive-extensions-rx/

Although, there have been several discussions on stackoverflow and general musings accross the net. 

D

Bass yep and that was 4 version in little over 3 years.  I am ready for a slow down.

Would like to see a unification of win phone 7 and desktop and wpf.  but beyond that I want to see it done right.  

D

Well during the channel9 live interview with ScottGU, said nothing to announce at this time, but yes work is still being done on Silverlight.

D

Don't forget Douglas Purdy leaving for Facebook, primarily for the work that Facebook is doing with the Graph API.

Which imo is something that the Data team at MS should be looking at strongly.  It is a weakness within the sql relational database system (which is interesting given the name that the rdbms is given is that relations have the least most complicated implementation in a rdbms)

DouglasH

Bass said:

rhm said:

*snip*

How do you do WPF development in CRuby? You could with IronRuby. You could mix and match C# and Ruby code in your ASP.NET projects. You could have a no effort Ruby scripting API for your app. This kind of stuff is very difficult to do with the C runtime.

 

I don't really even see much of a reason to use CRuby. JRuby is a fairly complete Ruby implementation. But it has full Java interop. And get this, it actually runs Ruby _faster_ then the original implementation. IronRuby had a lot of potential. It could have been the premier Ruby implementation with just a little more effort on Microsoft's part. IMO.

 

Dropping these languages really detracts from the whole "one runtime to rule them all" mantra. Well maybe that mantra never really existed. Maybe at some point Microsoft will change CLR to stand for C# Language Runtime.

Isn't that true just from the codedom, samples released.  

Think the best statement I have heard for the state of the codedom,  it is the best platform for creating code as long as it is exactly C#,  even in the case of generating VB.net. 

My Gut feeling is that within 2 versions F# will no longer be a language available in VS.  Given the removal of Jscript, in the recent past. apparent removal of support of the Iron languages. 

The sad part is that there will have to be a fundamental change of the BCL (immutable types, Isolation, actor based passing? instead of tightly coupled method passing) to support the coming multiprocessor revolution.  (talking 12 core or more)   So I do see significant changes coming in the near futre to all the base languages.  

Douglas

exoteric said:

Charles said:

*snip*

He's reflecting on the fact that F# has a dynamic feel to it due to its strong support for type-inference.

And there are strong hints that we may see this in C# in the future.

I personally believe it is a huge waste of time to repeat twice when setting up a variable when Compilers have long

be efficient at inferring type in 90% of the cases.

Douglas

mstefan said:

turrican said:

*snip*

Nothing to do with the language per se, I just don't really like how functional programming "feels", if that makes sense. I guess it's the result of years of indoctination with procedural programming. Or maybe I'm just getting old.

is that because Functional programming feels like real math and less objecty?? but is largely more composable if the problem is broken down properly.

BTW, SQL is largely a functional language. as well as xslt. for that matter most query languages. 

It has been said that those that learn functional programming become better procedural programmers, namely because they become better in breaking up the problem in more composable patterns.,

D

ManipUni said:

xgamer said:

*snip*

Agreed.

I think nobody cares. They all use metrics like speed, CPU usage, and ACID[x] to test the "quality" of their browsers. That's why you haven't seen browser UI change very much and why quality of life features are never addressed. The only reason we got built in web-search boxes was the HUGE amount of money to be made.

Well how many actually print to dead trees these days??

Although that is a huge complaint I do have about HTML5. 

D