|
The .NET Productivity team (a.k.a. Roslyn) is constantly thinking of new ways to make .NET developers more productive. "Every day, in every way, I'm getting better and better"
|
|
|
|
|
Kent Sharkey wrote: new ways to make .NET developers more productive.
specially with new icons.
I hope they stay away from the windows update team 
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
An interesting, at times philosophical, essay: [^]
Quote: Microsoft’s love-hate relationship with AOP
Microsoft has had a long love-hate relationship with aspect-oriented programming.
As all large corporations, Microsoft has the psychology of a dragon with many heads – each with its own eyes, mouth and brain. No wonder they are not always synchronized.
On one side, many teams have added AOP-ish features into their own product:
Microsoft Transaction Server, later renamed COM+
Custom behaviors in WCF
Interceptors in Unity
Action Filters in ASP.NET MVC and ASP.NET MVC Core
These teams didn’t just add these features because they were fun, but because they were useful. In all these technology stacks, aspects can be applied only at the boundaries of a component because the technology brokers the call between the client and the component. Neither the compiler nor the runtime engine was involved there, only the service host.
Another example of technology that vitally needs aspect-oriented programming is WPF. The amount of code required to implement INotifyPropertyChanged, dependency properties or command is colossal. This is why INotifyPropertyChanged is cited as a use case of source generators. Because it’s so useful.
«One day it will have to be officially admitted that what we have christened reality is an even greater illusion than the world of dreams.» Salvador Dali
|
|
|
|
|
BillWoodruff wrote: Another example of technology that vitally needs aspect-oriented programming is WPF. The amount of code required to implement INotifyPropertyChanged, dependency properties or command is colossal. This is why INotifyPropertyChanged is cited as a use case of source generators.
Winforms controls are no better in this regard. I've made source generators for it before, but nothing aspect oriented, because none of microsoft's frameworks aside from COM+ really gives you anything like proper AOP
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
The RFC may be the ARPANET’s most enduring legacy Just in case any would care to comment
|
|
|
|
|
Today's sciences still rely on a BC-era protocol: Books 
|
|
|
|
|
Not to nitpick, but BC-era writings were on scrolls. 
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
Daniel Pfeffer wrote: Not to nitpick,
Liar  
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Fair enough I'm accurate to within a human lifespan though since we have codices dating back to the turn of the 1st century.
|
|
|
|
|
That may be a modern human lifespan, but 2 or 3 generations at that point in history I suspect.
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough."
Alan Kay.
|
|
|
|
|
Ramesses II (1303 ~ 1213 BC). Our potential lifespan hasn't really changed. What has changed is our average lifespan.
|
|
|
|
|
Fair point.
"If you don't fail at least 90 percent of the time, you're not aiming high enough."
Alan Kay.
|
|
|
|
|
Today's internet still relies on stone tools and rubbing sticks to create fire.
(Sorry, by 2 PM EST I get rather snarky and often make meaningless and pointless comments. My coworkers put up with it, lol.)
|
|
|
|
|
Do you have any? Cow-orkers that is?
#SupportHeForShe
Government can give you nothing but what it takes from somebody else. A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you've got, including your freedom.-Ezra Taft Benson
You must accept 1 of 2 basic premises: Either we are alone in the universe or we are not alone. Either way, the implications are staggering!-Wernher von Braun
|
|
|
|
|
Apple, Google, Facebook, and Amazon versus Congress Drama, grandstanding, and tap-dancing?
|
|
|
|
|
Kent Sharkey wrote: Drama, grandstanding, and tap-dancing?
Don't forget the bullsh1t bingo and the idiocy mastering...
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
The search service looked at how much screen space Google dedicates to their own services in their search results for a sample of 15,269 typical searches culled from Google Trends when performed on an iPhone X. A new shocking report from the journal: "Yup"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scientists found a new way to improve the fragile and error-prone qubits that make up a quantum computing circuit — and it’s strange. I like big atoms and I cannot lie
|
|
|
|
|
If they are bigger, won't they be easier to be seen?
If they are easier to be seen, won't they be looked at more often?
If they are more often looked at, won't that make them more "volatile"?
Is that an improvement?.... or not?
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
I had another song for this response, but couldn't find it. I'll have to go with this one, which involves big atoms of one kind! Guaranteed enhancement!
|
|
|
|
|
Microsoft is removing all Windows downloads from the Microsoft Download Center that are signed using SHA-1 certificates on August 3rd, 2020. So if you need to download that .NET 2.0 SP1, better do it fast
|
|
|
|
|
Can't it be signed with another certificate?
Or is this another "we know better what you need / don't need than yourself"?
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Nelek wrote: Can't it be signed with another certificate?
Of course not. For a company that probably has a few billion dollars in change down the couch cushions in the lobby, writing a resigning script would obviously be tOo ExPeNsIvE.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
In partnership with researchers at MIT and the Georgia Institute of Technology, Intel scientists say they’ve developed an automated engine — Machine Inferred Code Similarity (MISIM) — that can determine when two pieces of code perform similar tasks, even when they use different structures and algorithms. diff called: It wants its job back
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
