Coffeehouse Thread

39 posts

the .Net Must be Failure

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • leighsword

    what the advantage of .net is, the MS call it that "easy to use". the old chinese(in about B.C) told us , "To Every one is easy, means NO ONE is".
    let us look at the history, why a Hard to use framework that the MFC will be popular(better than VB and BCL Much ), because that the complied code(local machine code) is fast in that time.

    so,a Garbage framework + a good compiler >>(larger better) a perfect framework + a bad compiler(JIT, an awful idea).

  • Manip

    wow... Nothing in that post made even the slightest amount of sense. Are you taking any kind of medication?

  • Eddie

    .NET is a huge success. It IS easy to use, and the performance of .NET has been more than acceptable. The time we save devloping our solutions, provides us with more than enough leftover money to purchase additional hardware if reaquired. This is the advantage of using .net.

    Further to this, take a look at the success of all interpreted languages, including scripting. There are huge amounts of projects, that utilis this, and the performance seems to be more than adaquite for the needs.

    Sure, you may well be able to develop something that runs quicker with c/c++, but at some stage you need to be able to deliver applications in a reasonable time frame.

    That's just my 2c

  • leighsword

    Eddie wrote:
    .NET is a huge success. It IS easy to use, and the performance of .NET has been more than acceptable. The time we save devloping our solutions, provides us with more than enough leftover money to purchase additional hardware if reaquired. This is the advantage of using .net.

    Further to this, take a look at the success of all interpreted languages, including scripting. There are huge amounts of projects, that utilis this, and the performance seems to be more than adaquite for the needs.

    Sure, you may well be able to develop something that runs quicker with c/c++, but at some stage you need to be able to deliver applications in a reasonable time frame.

    That's just my 2c

    there are no competitors(no choice), so you call .Net is a 'huge' success ,be acceptable.
    you must remember,the script is a script,not a programming language, it's not for a programmer as we are professional.

  • manickernel

    Manip wrote:
    wow... Nothing in that post made even the slightest amount of sense. Are you taking any kind of medication?


    I had to read it three times, but she does make sense. And give the girl credit, she is working in a language that is not only a second but uses an entirely different script. I am in no position to judge the merits of her argument, but I think she is saying that the traditional MFC and compiled code is better, even with it's difficult implementation, than .Net and the CLR.  I don't personally agree with that, but the only thing that has allowed us to evolve to this point is the hardware available. And that might just pehaps be an issue for some.

  • jonathanh

    Manip wrote:
    wow... Nothing in that post made even the slightest amount of sense. Are you taking any kind of medication?
    Now be nice - if you can't write Chinese then don't criticize leighsword's English Smiley

    For example, in "so,a Garbage framework + a good compiler >>(larger better) a perfect framework + a bad compiler(JIT, an awful idea)" it seems clear that leighsword is arguing for adding garbage collection to existing languages, instead of trying for academic perfection in a language and framework that is JIT-compiled.

  • Manip

    Well in all fairness to me, I didn't know she was a native Chinese speaker...

  • manickernel

    jonathanh wrote:

    For example, in "so,a Garbage framework + a good compiler >>(larger better) a perfect framework + a bad compiler(JIT, an awful idea)" it seems clear that leighsword is arguing for adding garbage collection to existing languages, instead of trying for academic perfection in a language and framework that is JIT-compiled.


    WOW! Now that is a truly Zen like interpretation;-)

  • manickernel

    Beer28 wrote:




    If that's what she meant, then I agree, so much so I'm making an MFC like implementation for linux which I work on when I'm not recovering from server disasters or doing pay work.




    Server Disasters??? I thought Linux was rock solid;-p

  • manickernel

    Leighsword wrote:

    ...the script is a script,not a programming language, it's not for a programmer as we are professional.


    Oh darling, I am just a simple sysadmin, but don't get me started on scripting, WSH and all, it is a language in it's on right. Perhaps simple, perhaps ADSI is just a console app, but it does have as much versatility as PERL.

    Edit: Oh, but Perl is just a scripting language Wink

  • manickernel

    Shell scripting is something I have a bit of experience with, ksh and bash, but I am far away from having any expertise. Perl is somthing I am learning, as it just appeals to my desire for a swiss knife in my job needs.
    But you are right, shell scripts are a very powerful tool in their own right, and I only wish WSH would incorporate some of the simplicity and logic of the Unix world.

  • manickernel

    You can download the Korn shell for linux as an add-on. In my case it is a requirement for Oracle.

  • manickernel

    Umhh, the Interix packages are primarily designed for Unix on Windows (SFU? or are we talking about something else?). That is not my environment. Although I have used it.  In any case the Korn shell for linux is the pdksh packages. They install as any other.  I know you are running Mandrake so it will be different.

    http://fedoraproject.org/fedorappc/FC-3/os/Fedora/RPMS/

    But basically what I am saying is you don't have to go through any sort of emulator, there is a free OSS version of Korn for Linux.

  • manickernel

    Yep, we've gotten way off topic now. Sorry Leighsgood. You kinda got me scared with the santy thing, I will have to check my Linux boxes tomorrow. 'Course I have kept Ipchains up on both of them, and they are in a DMZ protected by a firewall that runs a modified SCO kernel that will remain un-named. (But their latest version is actually going to a Linux Kernel, also very much modified)

  • manickernel

    I am a bit confused. Other than port 80 or 443 what else would you need? And an exploit runs not against a port but against the service behind it. I know earlier you mentioned SSH, now that has had some issues.

  • leighsword

    Manip wrote:

    Well in all fairness to me, I didn't know she was a native Chinese speaker...


    sorry for my poor writing skills get you into trouble.i am understand your mood,so let us talking in equal,don't care about the weakness of mine in english or whatever.

    btw,thank jonathanh for a full exposition of my statement, we really need an excelent complier for performance.

  • manickernel

    Leigh,
    Keep on posting doll. You are light years ahead of me in any case. Sorry about getting this thread all way off topic (what was the topic?) What kind of hardware are you running on?  Pentium III's or better? Just curiousity.

  • leighsword

    manickernel wrote:
    Leigh,
    Keep on posting doll. You are light years ahead of me in any case. Sorry about getting this thread all way off topic (what was the topic?) What kind of hardware are you running on?  Pentium III's or better? Just curiousity.

    haha, at least N light years.(1 USD >= 8 RMB)
    everyone can able to say what they need to say.
    our customer's computer is various,but one thing can be sure, that is can able to running Win98.

Comments closed

Comments have been closed since this content was published more than 30 days ago, but if you'd like to continue the conversation, please create a new thread in our Forums, or Contact Us and let us know.