|
I must say that I agree with the original poster... it's a nightmare to debug. And this is not a problem of structure, is a problem with the debugger itself.
When I developed for BeOS I liked the fact I can have one window per thread, so I could really see what was happening and affect it.
But, for the other comments about locking shared data and so on, I see a problem there, and the problem are created by the not-so good developers, that will develop in the same teams as the good ones.
I already corrected bugs in frameworks used all around the world, that were flawed because the lack of locking in right places. And, worst, the developers that did it really thought locks were not needed, as it was sometimes commented in the code.
I really like threading. I use threads a lot and, to be honest, I think a parallelforeach (or asyncforeach) will be better than extension methods to make thinks parallel, but I really see many bugs comming from developers that are not aware about things they must NOT do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
With the new debugging window for parralell processing it is a breeze.
Check out the following presentation (few slides lots of code):
http://channel9.msdn.com/pdc2008/TL26/
Vita est usquequaque virtus victus ut plenus. Ego non sum semper iustus tamen Ego sum nunquam nefas!
|
|
|
|
|
At work we are bound to our customers specifications.
And they have a very large network of old, single-core, computers, that won't replace, so we won't probably use .NET 4.0.
Migrating some applications to WPF and framework 3.5 was a big step/problem.
So I'll stick with 3.5 for a while
|
|
|
|
|
Very much true. I still have to ensure that sections of our product are able to run on 1.1 too.
It is the client that signs the pay check and we need to go by their business requirements rather than being lured and carried over by fantasies unleashed by technology vendors.
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar
Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
The woods are lovely, dark and deep,
But I have promises to keep,
And miles to go before I sleep,
And miles to go before I sleep!
|
|
|
|
|
When I can safely assume my prospective clients won't have to download in excess of 140 meg of bloat.
Until then I'm stuck with .Net2 - which I am very happy with 
Glen Harvy
|
|
|
|
|
Still writing native applications because my applications actually need to make efficient usage of the cpu and memory. They also need to be cross platform.
John
|
|
|
|
|
Cross-platform and native? You are not using cross-assemblers by any chance? Or maybe something like Qt?
|
|
|
|
|
I agree. I hope to NEVER use any version of .NET.  (Though I don't need any cross platform code)
|
|
|
|
|
But like .NET 3.0 and .NET 3.5, Microsoft will put them on automatic updates so everyone will get them eventually whether they want them or not.
|
|
|
|
|
Their not on automatic updates. They are selective afaik.
They should be part of the OS.
Glen Harvy
|
|
|
|
|
I agree that they should make .NET x.x part of the OS.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yet another useless ambiguous survey question. 
|
|
|
|
|
Useless indeed, since the single machines are harder to find, obviously we'll buy what's on the market, right?
Nuclear launch detected
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
