Re: ADO.NET 2.0 - ResultSet concerns
From: William Ryan eMVP (bill_at_NoSp4m.devbuzz.com)
Date: 04/11/04
- Next message: Cor Ligthert: "Re: ADO.NET 2.0 - ResultSet concerns"
- Previous message:
: "Re: How to determine if a DB column value is null?" - In reply to: Cor Ligthert: "Re: ADO.NET 2.0 - ResultSet concerns"
- Next in thread: Cor Ligthert: "Re: ADO.NET 2.0 - ResultSet concerns"
- Reply: Cor Ligthert: "Re: ADO.NET 2.0 - ResultSet concerns"
- Reply: Angel Saenz-Badillos[MS]: "Re: ADO.NET 2.0 - ResultSet concerns"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2004 10:59:36 -0400
Hi Cor:
I appreciate your opinion and just wanted to follow up. I think we both
agree that progress is good and that you need to go forward. If the
resultset was included from the beginning, I think it would be a LOT less
confusing for newbies. Maybe I'm just being a bit pessimistic in this
regard, but i foresee a ton of confusion b/c there's still a ton of
confusion and this will only blur the line. I suspect that many ADO
programmers are going to rely on it exclusively and I just foresee some
confusion. However, when I start sounding like a Chicken-Little, that's a
good indicator that I need to quit philosophizing and start reading more
about a subject.
Thanks again,
Bill
BTW, I responded to the DataReader Limitation post. didn't mean to step on
any toes there ;-)
"Cor Ligthert" <notfirstname@planet.nl> wrote in message
news:eBubFf5HEHA.3968@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> Hi Bill,
>
> History always repeats.
> When I started data processing, it was in the time of the punching cards.
> People where sorting them column by column, when you have to do a lot of
> columns and a hugs amount of cards that is hard labour.
>
> There where also machines with which what you could do intelligent
sequence
> checking by making let say program boards (was with wires), took sometimes
> time how to do it, but when you did know how, it was very easy to do (It
> was collecting the good sequences into the others while creating let say
> streams again from the wrongs ones).
>
> I think you have seen messages enough from me to understand which way I
> took. However, there where people in my environment who said I was only
> lazy.
>
> Then we got magnetic tape, that method that I did was of course also one
of
> the better methods to sort a tape. However, I did not like the magnetic
> tape; I did like the disc and especially the disc that could read fast
> randomly.
>
> However, there where people who said using a random disc was not sure and
> not as fast as a magnetic tape and they did use the magnetic disc as a
tape.
> (Do understand me; there are problems, which still can be done the best
way
> doing that.)
>
> I can go on of course, but what I want to say is that there are companies
> which have there biggest earnings from those people I tell you about. They
> still have environments build on the principles of the punch card or
> environments build on the time the students came in the computing
business.
>
> One of the things I have always like from Microsoft is that they did not
> listen to those people who are stopping progression. I hope this will be
the
> same in future.
>
> Just my thoughts about your message,
>
> Cor
>
>
>
>
>
- Next message: Cor Ligthert: "Re: ADO.NET 2.0 - ResultSet concerns"
- Previous message:
: "Re: How to determine if a DB column value is null?" - In reply to: Cor Ligthert: "Re: ADO.NET 2.0 - ResultSet concerns"
- Next in thread: Cor Ligthert: "Re: ADO.NET 2.0 - ResultSet concerns"
- Reply: Cor Ligthert: "Re: ADO.NET 2.0 - ResultSet concerns"
- Reply: Angel Saenz-Badillos[MS]: "Re: ADO.NET 2.0 - ResultSet concerns"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|