|
raddevus wrote: This is the price we pay for structured code based upon patterns that provide code organization.
No it isn't.  I have a reference website that I use for the starting point of anything else that I build that is just as structured, using good patterns and code organization.
In fact, better, I think, because I personally think that mixing C# code with Javascript that requires a template engine to parse and build as it serves pages, well, while it sounds cool, it's really bad practice, IMO, and I avoid it like the plague. The result is much more readable Javascript, clean separation between the HTML and the Javascript, and a well formed Javascript library that I've pieced together as I identify re-use.
raddevus wrote: However, those faster ways tend to lead people into creating code that other people don't want to read.
Too true. I can't imagine I could convince anyone here at work to do it differently. Regardless, I'm quite content to do development of my own websites with my tech, and if anyone wants to contribute, they have to learn it or bugger off. 
raddevus wrote: Again, this isn't a lecture but a good discussion about trade-offs.
True again. And the tradeoff is actually less with regards to technology than it is to people's perception, buy in, and willingness to learn, at least in my experience.
Marc
Latest Article - Merkle Trees
Learning to code with python is like learning to swim with those little arm floaties. It gives you undeserved confidence and will eventually drown you. - DangerBunny
Artificial intelligence is the only remedy for natural stupidity. - CDP1802
|
|
|
|
|
That's a great post. I agree with you.
This is a great summary of the situation...
Marc Clifton wrote: And the tradeoff is actually less with regards to technology than it is to people's perception, buy in, and willingness to learn,
Master developers can create new frameworks that have considered trade-offs and which create architectural frameworks that can be passed on to others. I honestly think that is the case of what you have. Now, getting others to buy in to that can be problematic. Also, many companies are just going to ask what Stack you're working on and expect a limited answer like:
1. ASP.NET MVC
2. LAMP
3. AngularJS (which isn't actually complete either since you need backend) -- but just saying Angular gives a dev Gravitas.
4. other stack
But my point here is that companies just hear the buzzwords and have good or bad feelings about the specific stack and that's basically how they determine their architectural underpinnings.
Or some guy comes along and says, "I know Python and Django. I could do the whole thing in a week."
2 years later.... 
|
|
|
|
|
raddevus wrote: Also, many companies are just going to ask what Stack you're working on
Exactly. Somewhere along the way, the concept of "full stack developer" came along, whereas my concept of a "full stack" is rather different.
The worst part is, these so-called full stack developers are expected to know the Javascript, the DOM, CSS, some client-side MVVM, some single page tech, as well as some layout tech like Bootstrap (which is a time saver), as well as the back-end: writing the REST API's, the database design, etc. Oh, and not to mention, this one developer is expected to create performant, good looking, web sites! Holy script, JavaMan!
And frankly, given how fubar'd client side development is, I much prefer the back-end.
raddevus wrote: 2 years later....
So so true. The CTO where I used to work made this promise. And literally, 3 years later...
Marc
Latest Article - Merkle Trees
Learning to code with python is like learning to swim with those little arm floaties. It gives you undeserved confidence and will eventually drown you. - DangerBunny
Artificial intelligence is the only remedy for natural stupidity. - CDP1802
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: as well as the back-end: writing the REST API's, the database design, etc. Oh, and not to mention, this one developer is expected to create performant, good looking, web sites! Holy script, JavaMan!
We just need you to know everything about everything.
Great discussion. 
|
|
|
|
|
"
Or some guy comes along and says, "I know Python and Django. I could do the whole thing in a week."
2 years later.... Laugh | :laugh: "
Yup - been there, suffered through that.  Perfectly describes a couple of projects I worked on where some noob engineer comes by with the latest toy language/framework/whatever and promises the world to management, who naturally buy into it. 
I'll stick with what works, then add new stuff if it helps.
"Computer games don't affect kids; I mean if Pac-Man affected us as kids, we'd all be running around in darkened rooms, munching magic pills and listening to repetitive electronic music."
-- Marcus Brigstocke, British Comedian
|
|
|
|
|
|
Xcode with objective c rocks. They improved also the pods import. Not sure what problems you have with it, but overall can't complain at all.
modified 20-Oct-19 21:02pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Over all it's not bad. Was more thinking about just the sheer size of its footprint and sluggishness at times. I was also thinking about the issue I ran into below.
My code has all been XCode via Swift (not objective-c).
But, here's a problem I was _lucky_ enough to stumble into first and I was in the middle of a project and it totally crushed my app and design view. Luckily I reverted the code and was able to finally fix it via editing the design file via text editor (outside of XCode).
It ended up being a bug in XCode.
ios - Why do internal inconsistencies occur in Main.storyboard and how do I get around it? - Stack Overflow[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds exactly like my box (before I up'ed to SSD - definite improvement and 16G - no noticable change)
but even before the up's it was never that slow and never thrashed even when compiling in running in full 'dev mode' (VS13, MySQL server and clients, NotePad++, browser - many tabs, email excel and word all at the same time.)!
Disable the bloat services and useless task scheduler entries
start with superfetch - it on purposly fills all memory with useless apps: MS says it 'loads the apps you use most' - that's bullshit, after months of use I caught it still loading [ms] apps I never used even once, and not loading a lot I did use every day. Everything got faster without it. It's useless, even without SSD the advantage (even if it worked properly) would be negligable.
Absolutely avoid chrome like it has leprosy.
Disable stupid crap, like the Adobe Reader update checker.
If you trust yourself turn off any anti-virus full-time read/write-to-disk scanning (in fact mine's on-demand only) - just scan anything you download as and when.
Unless you must have it SQL Server is a hog.
(BTW: Only need Compact Edition for VS to work)
Even now with firefox, and a couple of explorer windows and taskman there's only 29 processes in my taskman list - before clean up was closer to 40 and it seemed even moving the mouse would rattle the disk. (Mostly that was the superfetch effect - swapping active apps in and out to save the precious pre-loaded ms crapolapps.)
I've got an old i3 laptop that outperforms one i7 machine a client provides for me at their office - but then again they loaded it with "speed up" utilities - what a joke those things are.
Sin tack
the any key okay
|
|
|
|
|
You won't notice a difference with 16GB of RAM until you have 3 instances of Visual Studio, database management software, Outlook, Firefox (with 20 tabs open), Chrome (streaming Pandora and level 2 stock data), and a remote connection to a server all open at the same time. The highest I've gotten my work machine to was nearly 12GB 
if (Object.DividedByZero == true) { Universe.Implode(); }
Meus ratio ex fortis machina. Simplicitatis de formae ac munus. -Foothill, 2016
|
|
|
|
|
Lopatir wrote: I've got an old i3 laptop that outperforms one i7 machine a client provides for me at their office - but then again they loaded it with "speed up" utilities - what a joke those things are.
That's really a hoot - more code to "speed up" a machine. If you've ever written assembly you know that more code never means more speed!
|
|
|
|
|
Don't debug. Build, refresh page. If something goes wrong, set breakpoint and instead of F5 use one of those VS AttachTo AttachTo-Next - Visual Studio Marketplace extensions for debugging. Makes for a pleasanter experience. Not perfect but better than F5. Debug JS in Chrome dev tools or whatever.
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
My company forced upgraded me to a lower spec computer than what I had prior... (upgraded meaning Win10 on a slower machine instead of Win7 on a faster one).
Before I gave up the old machine, I managed to discover that the company webpage had it documented as a lower end laptop than what it was, and I had the hardware guy here remove the 'incorrect' components and put them in my downgraded (I mean upgraded) laptop. I think I almost made it out with an equal exchange.
But yah... those load times when working on a project really break up any attempt at work. It is just long enough for my mind to wander and think about something else. So instead of losing 1 minute every time I hit F5... I really lose about 10 
|
|
|
|
|
I never had this problem with VS 2010. Recently, I was forced to upgrade an ASP.Net app (to keep up with report version) and started using VS 2015. My inner loop suddenly got unpleasantly disrupted watching the indeterminate wait cursors. 4GB of memory doesn't go far with VS 2015! 
I'm waiting for the dust to settle with VS 2017. I'm actually past due for new hardware, but this 7.5 y/o rig still handles most of my needs quite well. (OK, the SSD was put in just a year and a half ago...huge difference!)
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
|
|
|
|
|
Up to VS2012 there wasn't a (big) problem. VS2013 onwards seems to hog resources and take forever to load even a simple web page. This makes the code/test/fix/test cycle painful.
We're philosophical about power outages here. A.C. come, A.C. go.
|
|
|
|
|
I have a 5-year-old Dell XPS 8300 that has an "old" i7/2600. It's always been what us older developers call a "screamer" but after putting a 1TB SSD and 16GB of main into the thing it's REALLY a screamer (running Windows 7). I figure this machine will probably do it for the duration. Visual Studio flies on it.
|
|
|
|
|
Errr but if you had better hardware, what would you be developing in then? Notepad++? 
|
|
|
|
|
Loading all those assemblies, of which you may only use 1%, will certainly take time. Try .net core and only load what you need
You can disable client side debugging in VS2017
This may help a little. For a complete fix you may need to change your computer and employer as well.
|
|
|
|
|
Well it sure isn't Quick, but I've never really experienced anything like what you have there... My guess it's the hardware that is the main culprit.
I have a Core i7-4700MQ at 2.4 GHz, 32GB RAM and a SSD on my work laptop. I guess I'm one of the lucky ones.
Wexelblats algorithm:
Pick two: 1. Good, 2. Fast, 3. Cheap
|
|
|
|
|
Hehe :P
I used to have something like that until a year ago, when I switched to Lenovo Thinkpad P70 (64GB of RAM, insanely fast SSD + 4k monitor). Cost a $ton, but totally worth it 
I can have 4-5 instances of VS 2013/resharper without a blink running in parallel with a 16GB VM
Totally worth it
-- Log Wizard - a Log Viewer that is easy and fun to use!
|
|
|
|
|
At this speed, by the year 3500, if you hit F5, you can just forget about the whole thing, go live and die, and leave the debugging to your children.
Also, I think that Visual Studio processes that people will use must be lauched by their grand-parents when the programmer's parents are still in foetus stage. By the time one can program, 2 generations later, the start pages of all instances will be ready to go.
If you accidently close an instance, be careful... but you still have more probably. But if you need to reboot that pc, oops...
There is no cloud! It's just someone else's pc! (Read it somewhere)
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: It takes for flipping ever (a good 30 seconds) for Visual Studio to launch the website as it interfaces through IIS and loads a hundred System.Microsoft.sh*t assemblies.
You're lucky. The solution I work with has 63 projects, when I fire up the project, I go for a walk, chat a little with co-workers and usually return after 10 minutes. My entire PC slows down. But I blame this mostly because of my cheap 5400 RPM HD. I wish I could purchase an SSD using my own money.
But in the end, I am glad I use Visual Studio (2015) for this project. A project with this size and complexity would be a lot harder to maintain if not having this many features VS can provide. It saves me a lot of time in the end.
Marc Clifton wrote: If #2 happens
I don't have this problem, I think you may be running into some configuration issue. Just disable client-side debugging, you'll probably start the project faster too.
Marc Clifton wrote: And as I said above, the crap machine they give you here at work is probably in large part responsible for my experience.
Yep
To alcohol! The cause of, and solution to, all of life's problems - Homer Simpson
Our heads are round so our thoughts can change direction - Francis Picabia
|
|
|
|
|
The machine they give you at work is COMPLETELY responsible for your trouble. ASP.Net and its related technologies really are first-class in their capabilities. Of course, I'm still using the 2008 version of all this so maybe they've added some bloat in more recent versions.
|
|
|
|
|
ClockMeister wrote: I'm still using the 2008 version of all this so maybe they've added some bloat in more recent versions.
I remember 2008 was fairly speedy, though I kept getting annoyed at the rendering time of the pages even then because of the template engine.
On the other hand, I'm using the new and shiny VS2017! Haven't tried VS2008, which I think is installed somewhere, but certainly not on the office machine -- my only other option in VS2015.
Marc
Latest Article - Merkle Trees
Learning to code with python is like learning to swim with those little arm floaties. It gives you undeserved confidence and will eventually drown you. - DangerBunny
Artificial intelligence is the only remedy for natural stupidity. - CDP1802
|
|
|
|
|
Hey Marc,
I've got VS2017 in a Windows 10 VM (neither of which I do anything but fiddle with). I do some coding in VS2010 (C# & VB.Net) but for my own stuff I stick with VS2008/Active Reports 6/SQL Server (2008->2014). Most of my work is desktop / back end stuff and a spattering of ASP.Net - I really don't have any reason to upgrade my tools (especially since I pay for them myself). The output from my 2008 released stuff works on everything from XP on up through 10 - I just don't see any point in spending coin for upgrades to something that does the job just fine.
The bottom line here is, basically, "If it ain't broke, why fix it?" 
 Olde Country Programmer (Clockmeister)
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
