Re: Can Someone Change My Mind About .NET?
From: Jon Skeet [C# MVP] (skeet_at_pobox.com)
Date: 04/30/04
- Next message: Nathon Dalton: "Using Session State"
- Previous message: Rick Spiewak: "Re: Help - Best approach using Shared Classes ?"
- In reply to: Brandon Potter: "Re: Can Someone Change My Mind About .NET?"
- Next in thread: William Stacey [MVP]: "Re: Can Someone Change My Mind About .NET?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2004 19:13:48 +0100
Brandon Potter <microsoft@brandonpotter_nospam.com> wrote:
> When I made that reference (and I think the reference that Mike is referring
> to, although I cannot speak for him), I am referring to the general
> "feeling" that you get from programming in .NET (especially VB.NET) -- Since
> you start a project and it's able to run and display an interactive user
> interface from the first second you use it (thank you, code generator), it's
> like all you have to do is put in the functionality, which is more like a
> scripting language.
That has nothing to do with scripting - it's just being RAD-oriented.
Personally I avoid the forms designer when I can, but there we go. (I
tend to get more readable and maintainable code that way.)
> I have heard this reference once before by a team of programmers that wished
> to remain in C++ to retain their status of "real" programmers and would not
> touch .NET.
That sounds like a silly comment to me from people who care more about
being "macho" than being productive. Why spend time thinking about
problems which have already been solved when you can be tackling new
problems inherent in whatever application you're trying to write?
> I was thinking to myself how I would never hire them with that
> attitude, but it might just be because I don't think you should care how
> "real" or "fake" you are as a programmer if you produce robust results that
> keep customers happy.
Exactly - and as long as you enjoy your job, of course.
> I guess if you are working in a RAD environment where
> you can produce results quickly and don't have to mess with the more "geeky"
> side of things (establishing the Win32 While() message loop and spend hours
> and hours writing the code to paint the display), then it makes you look
> more like a script programmer.
I don't think so - but then maybe I don't have the pejorative idea of a
script programmer that your colleagues do. There are plenty of times
when scripting is the best solution to a problem, but that doesn't make
it any less "real" programming, IMO. To me, a *good* programmer knows
to use the best tool for the job. There are still good reasons to use
native code rather than managed code in some cases, but "looking cool
as a programmer" is never one of them.
> Kind of in the same way that some people
> swear on C# and play down VB.NET because it's a more complicated syntax,
> when the functionality is almost identical.
>
> Any philosophical thoughts on "real" vs. "fake" programmer psychology? ;)
Try getting them to explain how they tackle all interntationalisation
problems (including surrogates etc), their multithreading strategies
etc. There's still plenty to think about in .NET.
-- Jon Skeet - <skeet@pobox.com> http://www.pobox.com/~skeet If replying to the group, please do not mail me too
- Next message: Nathon Dalton: "Using Session State"
- Previous message: Rick Spiewak: "Re: Help - Best approach using Shared Classes ?"
- In reply to: Brandon Potter: "Re: Can Someone Change My Mind About .NET?"
- Next in thread: William Stacey [MVP]: "Re: Can Someone Change My Mind About .NET?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
