Re: someobject.GetType() - low case

Well,

Just imagine, you used to write your own name like Miha, you wrote a lot of
documents, articles, etc., then somebody wants to change it to mikha or miha
just because it's upgrade and the standard was changed. You will never
recognize your own name from that moment. Will you accept that? Listen, it's
not SQL where you can select is it a case sensitive or not, it's something
different, don't you think? And what could be the reasons leading the same
..NET 1.1 working on Windows Advanced Server 2000 and Windows XP Pro to the
different results WITH or WITHOUT leading underscore in the CurrentURL? I
had to fix this idiot's bug with my own code. And you could just imaging how
easy was to debug and find that on the production server. And not only that.
There are a lot of "improvements" like these above. And I actually didn't
ask your opinion that "somebody had a reason to do that". If the same API
call returns DIFFERENT results from version to version it's crap. We'll
never be able to write good programs using this kind of environment. That's
the reality. Btw, have you ever seen the complete list of "improvements"
done by M$. I doubt it's published in a full value.

Just D.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Miha Markic" <miha at rthand com>
Newsgroups: microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet
Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2007 12:38
Subject: Re: someobject.GetType() - low case



"Just D" <no@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:2ctPi.758$W06.284@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
As well as the price of working with Windows... Every new upgrade is
unpredictable and the new version of the same API will not necerrarily be
compatible. Geeee...

I'm sure the class name should be presented as it was created and called
without any stupid "improvements" made by some crazy contractor guys
writing the API implementation for different versions.

Look, where you are doing major upgrades you have breaking changes. Now,
if you don't read what those changes are before you are upgrading it is
your fault.
I am sure they have their reasons.
Furthermore, nobody is forcing you to upgrade if you don't want. If you
feel comfortable with 1.1. then stick with it - you can run .net versions
side by side.

--
Miha Markic [MVP C#, INETA Country Leader for Slovenia]
RightHand .NET consulting & development www.rthand.com
Blog: http://cs.rthand.com/blogs/blog_with_righthand/


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Data sheet view requirements
    ... Note that, in case you didn't know this, there is a way to get "Edit In" functionality working with Office 2K clients. ... I realize that getting them to upgrade to 2003 would fix the problem since apparently their is API or something that is included in the Office 2003 load during instill. ... Does anyone know if this API or whatever the software interface includes to support data sheet view is available from MS separately for independent install and use as a stop gap until these users are upgraded to a newer Office version in the near future? ...
    (microsoft.public.sharepoint.portalserver)
  • Re: Mobile 5
    ... Can you imagine the outcry if MS made both! ... Since the PPC OS is ... >> has traditionally made its own brand of OS upgrade. ... microsoft still supported windiws 95 ...
    (microsoft.public.pocketpc)
  • Re: PowerBook G4 hard drive (& possibly more) replacement?
    ... I imagine this is a warning sign ... As long as I have the G4 opened up, I could upgrade the ... suggestions for a good replacement ...
    (comp.sys.mac.portables)
  • Re: Kinder walk 14th January 2006
    ... >>> Maybe it's just that Gravity is highly configurable. ... I imagine that if ... >>> I upgrade, I'll have to spend a reasonable amount of time working out ...
    (uk.rec.walking)
  • Re: someobject.GetType() - low case
    ... As well as the price of working with Windows... ... Every new upgrade is ... the API implementation for different versions. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.framework.adonet)