|
I call it a mess. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You've obviously never had a back alley enema.
|
|
|
|
|
They are illegal in my state.
|
|
|
|
|
There are times when ignorance is a blessing.
|
|
|
|
|
You can accomplish much the same result skinny dipping at the waterpark.
Will Rogers never met me.
|
|
|
|
|
$49 is a ripoff. $5 worth of habaneros will clean you out just as well. 
|
|
|
|
|
thrakazog wrote: $5 worth
Aw heck you spend too much, a small McDummolds fries clear me out every time. 
It was broke, so I fixed it.
|
|
|
|
|
thrakazog wrote: $49 is a ripoff. $5 worth of habaneros will clean you out just as well
So will a $1 bottle of bleach  there that's 4 bucks saved.
|
|
|
|
|
Just so long as their 2-for-1 offer doesn't involve a double nozzle...
|
|
|
|
|
Consider this statement:
Because you create a ControlTemplate in XAML, you can change a control's appearance without writing any code.
Source: MSDN
I know that there is a difference between 'Markup' and 'Code'; however, the statement still seemed humorous to me because the phrase 'without writing any code' usually implies a designer or wizard - or ease of use - when in fact XAML can be quite involved.
Consider the following tiny snippet of XAML:
<ControlTemplate TargetType="ComboBox">
<Grid>
<Border x:Name="ContentPresenterBorder">
<Grid>
<ToggleButton x:Name="DropDownToggle"
HorizontalAlignment="Stretch" VerticalAlignment="Stretch"
Margin="-1" HorizontalContentAlignment="Right">
<Path x:Name="BtnArrow" Height="4" Width="8"
Stretch="Uniform" Margin="0,0,6,0" Fill="Black"
Data="F1 M 300,-190L 310,-190L 305,-183L 301,-190 Z " />
</ToggleButton>
<ContentPresenter x:Name="ContentPresenter" Margin="6,2,25,2">
<TextBlock Text=" " />
</ContentPresenter>
</Grid>
</Border>
<Popup x:Name="Popup">
<Border x:Name="PopupBorder"
HorizontalAlignment="Stretch" Height="Auto"
BorderThickness="{TemplateBinding BorderThickness}"
BorderBrush="Black" Background="White" CornerRadius="3">
<ScrollViewer x:Name="ScrollViewer" BorderThickness="0" Padding="1">
<ItemsPresenter/>
</ScrollViewer>
</Border>
</Popup>
</Grid>
</ControlTemplate>
Is the take away supposed to be: Thank heavens I was able to write that in XAML and didn't have to resort to writing any code. I just don't see the big relief here. The selling point: Do it without code is falling a bit flat.
|
|
|
|
|
Reading that hasn't changed my view that I was right to stick with WinForms.
|
|
|
|
|
Eloquent, and yet I am unconvinced. MS are still supporting MFC, so WinForms isn't going away, and I believe I will still be "singing this tune" for some time to come.
|
|
|
|
|
But...but...but...we frequently change the UI without changing the working code. Don't we?
Never understood the separation of duties stuff. I've yet to go in and just rework the UI for no apparent reason.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, we've never had to hit multiple UI other than desktop and web, which use pretty much the same components, anyway, i.e. GridView vs. DataGridView, etc.
The business logic doesn't change all that much between the two. (Although I often cut back on how much is displayed for the web. No one likes to wait an hour for a browser to render a zillion rows of a dataset. :p )
|
|
|
|
|
And it's not like there's no learning curve to WPF!
|
|
|
|
|
Funny thing is that you could probably write that in code with half the lines, and a 1/10th of the possible issues
|
|
|
|
|
They are right, you didn't have to edit code, you had to edit bloated crockshüt of XML.
|
|
|
|
|
Mixing metaphors here, you've hit the worst defect in the WPF ecosystem precisely on the head. Microsoft provides three tools for creating the XAML representation of a UI element:
#1: Expression Blend
#2: The Visual Studio WPF 'designer'
#3: Visual Studio, manual editing of XAML text with the preview pane open
#1 is worthless. The UI is impossible to read unless you have perfect visual acuity, as the gray-on-grey scheme is a muddled mess. Blend is also an extra cost item, and not included in Visual Studio.
#2 is also worthless, because the designer adds explicit dimensions and unwanted margin settings all over the place. It also has whimsical notions of where in a layout to drop new controls. I've seen it wrap a control in a canvas and use explicit positions to place a control in a grid.
Approach #3 is the one I use. My WPF layouts flow appropriately and adapt to screen resolution and desktop point size settings nicely. Of course, this approach does put the lie to the whole notion of 'I didn't have to write any code'...
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
Gary Wheeler wrote: Approach #3 is the one I use.
Same here. I like it, but there is a huge learning curve.
|
|
|
|
|
The irony here is that, even manually editing XAML, I can create a beautiful UI faster than I ever could in the native world. With WPF I don't have to use extraordinary measures to get things to lay out nicely.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
I agree, some things that just wouldn't be feasible in Windows Forms are easy in WPF.
|
|
|
|
|
Meh. It might not be turing complete but it's still code. If it doesn't look like the thing it describes then it's code. Maybe not source code, but code.
|
|
|
|
|
I didn't want to go there.
I don't have a degree in Computer Science but make a living programming.
I didn't want to have the CS degrees waved in my face by confusing the two concepts of 'markup' vs. 'code'.
It's a hot button issue.
*hides*
|
|
|
|
|
...said the engineering student at his University graduation. Thanks to QA!
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
