Re: net 3 replaces net 1?

Tech Tip: Click here to run a free scan for Windows Errors and optimize PC performance

Hi Cor,

"Cor Ligthert [MVP]" <notmyfirstname@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:Om$iek$IHHA.816@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Peter,

Are you sure of that?

Peter is correct. If an app is compiled for 1.1, and you are a 'user' of
that app, then you have to keep 1.1 installed on your machine. If you are
the 'author/programmer' of that app, on the other hand, you can install a
newer version of visual studio, recompile, and then consume .net 2.0 or .net
3.0 (which is the addition of a slew of classes to .net 2.0). In that case,
the new DLL you create would not need .net 1.1.


In my idea would 2.0 replace completely version 1.x the problem is that
there are some bugs in that area or better no backward compatiblity of old
bugs was concerned in.

I think you are asking why some issues were not 'addressed' when 2.0 was
released. The reason being that those issues are nearly all involved in
"tradeoffs in behavior."

In other words, a class could behave in mechanism (1) or mechanism (2).
Mechanism (1) was chosen and has side effect (x). People who don't like
side effect (x) would prefer that MS had chosen mechanism (2). However,
other developers who don't experience side effect (x) or don't care about it
have written code that depends on Mechanism (1). Therefore, switching to
Mechanism (2) in the 2.0 version of the framework would break backwards
compatibility.

There are always tradeoffs. That is life. I think the basic premise goes
something like this: You are always free to write a new class that
implements Mechanism (2) and make it available as part of a third-party
library. MS had to pick one. Picking two is bad.


Maybe is that the reason that I get now on bug reports to much messages in
my eyes that say that they cannot be resolved because of backward
compatibility.

Cor


I hope that helps,


--
--- Nick Malik [Microsoft]
MCSD, CFPS, Certified Scrummaster
http://blogs.msdn.com/nickmalik

Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this forum are my own, and not
representative of my employer.
I do not answer questions on behalf of my employer. I'm just a
programmer helping programmers.
--


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: net 3 replaces net 1?
    ... official message from Microsoft. ... in fact upwards compatibility.. ... old bugs was concerned in. ... in my eyes that say that they cannot be resolved because of backward ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.general)
  • Re: Vista version check volunteers?
    ... Looks like vb apps might honour some sort of compatibility setting after ... getversionex to determine if the os is pre- or post-win2000, and, based on ... With this app compiled and run as usual, ...
    (microsoft.public.vb.general.discussion)
  • Re: "Ivy League"
    ... that Apple revs their OS every few years to break all the older ... Apple has broken backward compatibility twice in the last 20 years. ... app is launched in). ... I was offering an explanation of one reason why Mac software is ...
    (soc.motss)
  • Re: Suggestions for text search and replace tool
    ... It's got bugs. ... it takes the app 30 seconds at about 100% of one 2.5GHz CPU to do ... The Classic app I'm currently using does the search and replace job with ... MassReplaceIt isn't really ready for the prime time yet, ...
    (uk.comp.sys.mac)
  • Re: Over 100 Microsoft MVPs Have Signed Online Petition - Give Us Back VB!!
    ... > They work *great* in Delphi. ... I don't know a serious VB app in which the dev trusts data ... They did do a good job on VB6, with regard to language stability and moving ... Good luck in lobbying for VB.net compatibility. ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)