|
As an IDE I simply use UltraEdit (a decent text editor).
Then to compile, we have the Nant build scripts (that call csc) and to run tests, NUnit.
To debug, I used to use the ClrDebug and attach to the process. But after installing a new SQL Server sometime last winter it tried to put some lite version of Visual Studio on it and it got rid of that, unfortunately.
I'm meeting with this guys next week for a "knowledge transfer" because I will be responsible for maintaining applications written by this person and I just don't get it. Apparently, he doesn't use an IDE to make .net applications.
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, I'd categorize that as a 'WTF'...
If you're programming in a .NET language, and you're doing it in Windows, there's no reason not to use an IDE, whether it's Visual Studio (even the Express versions), SharpDevelop, or whatever...
Probably a guy used to building C++ applications under *nix with Emacs and gcc...
|
|
|
|
|
Cool. Thanks for the response.
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
|
|
|
|
|
Technically what they are doing is quite possible.
However, why do this effort when there is an editor already available.
Maybe they dont have the funding to buy a full edition of Visual Studio. Express editions can always be tried in that case.
Too much of heaven can bring you underground
Heaven can always turn around
Too much of heaven, our life is all hell bound
Heaven, the kill that makes no sound
|
|
|
|
|
Nope, we are paying a ton of money. We have spent millions on this application and they guy is getting paid quite a bit per hour to do custom work for us.
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
modified on Saturday, July 30, 2011 11:50 AM
|
|
|
|
|
Honestly, Nant and NUnit make sense. Large projects do require build scripts.
NANT or MSBuild both could have been used. The vendor has apparentely gone with NANT.
Nunit is also ok because I suppose all the code is being unit tested (or perhaps Test Driven Development) is being used.
I'm not quite clear why CLRDebug is being used though (when Visual Studio could have been used just as well).
Maybe asking the vendor would be the best approach.
Too much of heaven can bring you underground
Heaven can always turn around
Too much of heaven, our life is all hell bound
Heaven, the kill that makes no sound
|
|
|
|
|
Build scripts is one thing, but coding without an IDE, how can one justify that to a client when you are getting paid by the hour?
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
|
|
|
|
|
ToddHileHoffer wrote: Build scripts is one thing, but coding without an IDE, how can one justify that to a client when you are getting paid by the hour?
From that I can only suppose that you think they are less productive than they would be otherwise.
The fact that you like an IDE and are familiar with it and that you would be less productive without it has absolutely nothing to do with the output of someone else.
Not to mention the following.
- You are suggesting that you personally would be at a measurable disadvantage in your approach to the entire craft without it. So for example there is no point now nor in the future that anyone should ever consider hiring you for a position that requires use of a non-windows system.
- You are suggesting that such a disadvantage would be a significance to your total value as a developer. Which can only suggest to me that you don't spend much time on say design/architecture or at least think that you achieve that only via your IDE. It also precludes things like knowledge transfer, documentation, mentoring, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
jschell wrote: Not to mention the following.
- You are suggesting that you personally would be at a measurable disadvantage in your approach to the entire craft without it. So for example there is no point now nor in the future that anyone should ever consider hiring you for a position that requires use of a non-windows system.
- You are suggesting that such a disadvantage would be a significance to your total value as a developer. Which can only suggest to me that you don't spend much time on say design/architecture or at least think that you achieve that only via your IDE. It also precludes things like knowledge transfer, documentation, mentoring, etc.
No, I'm saying it is inefficient to code .net in a text editor. The entire point of using VS is to increase productivity. Anyone who uses a text editor over an IDE is at a disadvantage. You can make a program work without using an IDE, it is just more difficult and time consuming.
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
|
|
|
|
|
ToddHileHoffer wrote: No, I'm saying it is inefficient to code .net in a text editor. The entire point
of using VS is to increase productivity. Anyone who uses a text editor over an
IDE is at a disadvantage. You can make a program work without using an IDE, it
is just more difficult and time consuming.
I understand exactly what you are claiming.
I can claim exactly the opposite - you are in fact less productive. I can explain why as well...because you rely so much on what the IDE does for you that you do not actually understand what your code is doing. Which becomes a problem when something serious in production goes wrong. Thus you might spends days or even weeks tracking down a problem (which is subtracted from your productive time) when those problems do show up.
Now I could be mistaken in that statement. Because I have no evidence. But your statement has none either.
Personally I believe that neither statement is true. To prove it one must first find a way to actually measure productivity. Then find a way to meaningfully compare it including similar projects, knowledge, experience etc. And use a large enough sample set. Then measure it and determine that it significant in terms of the actual work that a developer does during the week (precluding meetings, design, lunch and time spend on fanstasy football.)
|
|
|
|
|
Whilst IDEs do allow developers who have no more than a basic understanding of what they are doing to reach their end goal, very few developers fall into that category (in my experience at least)
It is also true, however, that one can be an efficient developer without reliance on an IDE.
Considering the original post described the fact that they are using build sripts, unit testing and some form of debugger the variable here is physically writing the code.
VS (as the IDE in question) provides the following (off the top of my head) to facilitate the code writing
- intellisense
- snippets
- shortcuts such as 'find references' and 'goto definition'
- refactoring
Intellisense:
without an IDE providing intellisense (and if your text editor provides this it is arguably an IDE) there is a requirement for the developer to know the entire class library with which they are working or to have a reference, such as MSDN, available (and to be able to search it as efficiently) ... if you can do this, bravo sir!
Snippets:
Easily replicated with copy and paste from a file of useful code snippets
Shortcuts:
Most text editors these days are good at text searching, however they wont have awareness of symbols or scope
Refactoring:
Same as with shortcuts, text replacement is normally pretty good in text editors (and macros can enhance it) but you still lack the scoping and contextual awareness
I would say this is down to developer preference. If you are familiar with a text editor and have a good memory of the class libraries you may well be more efficient using that approach than struggling with VS forcing you to do things the microsoft way. I, myself, cut my teeth in visual studio (im choosing to forget my brief forray into delphi) and would struggle without an IDE, not because I lack skill as a developer (at least i hope) but because everything i type would come out as the first 2 letters followed by a space 
|
|
|
|
|
Are you joking? You'll need to handle this situation in a politically sensitive manner (someone paid for this rubbish) but the code will need to be rewritten.
"You get that on the big jobs."
|
|
|
|
|
I bet he does use an IDE. I suspect that he thinks it makes him look cool, macho and hardcore claiming he's not using an IDE of some description. The reality is that it just makes him look like an unproductive prat.
|
|
|
|
|
Pete O'Hanlon wrote: I bet he does use an IDE. I suspect that he thinks it makes him look cool, macho and hardcore claiming he's not using an IDE of some description. The reality is that it just makes him look like an unproductive prat.
Exactly.
I didn't get any requirements for the signature
|
|
|
|
|
I have worked with someone who used a similar setup.
The product we were working on had a java server and a c# client with a proprietry script for communication.
Basically the guy was a java developer and militantly anti-microsoft. If he was ever forced to touch the client he would do it on his FreeBSD machine in a text editor (albeit with some syntax highlighting etc) and, 9 times out of 10, simply check it in expecting it to work (muggins here normally ended up spotting the error and fixing it)
He was also my senior developer (though to be fair he was a very good developer, just chose to drop the ball if it meant he could avoid contact with anything microsoft-y)
|
|
|
|
|
Hi, can someone pleez teel me how to create an exe file out of your c# code in Micro soft visual studio 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
Have you tried to build your application?
CQ de W5ALT
Walt Fair, Jr., P. E.
Comport Computing
Specializing in Technical Engineering Software
|
|
|
|
|
yes i have. i wanted to know. how do we get a single icon which we can click and get you application running. without opening the visual studio.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, I'm still using VS 2008, but if the layout is the same, there should be an exe file created in a subdirectory of your project\bin directory. However, if you want to distribute your app and it needs any other libraries, etc., you should create a Setup Project or Publish it from the Build menu, assuming the menu layout of VS 2020 is similar to 2008.
I create a Setup project for all of my applications and when I get things working the way I want, I just build the setup project and create an installable msi file.
CQ de W5ALT
Walt Fair, Jr., P. E.
Comport Computing
Specializing in Technical Engineering Software
|
|
|
|
|
i m understand yr ans;
pls define specifically
|
|
|
|
|
You REALLY need to pickup a beginners book on whatever language you're using and work through it.
You make an .EXE file every time you run your app from inside Visual Studio. He was telling you where to find it, but apparently you have no idea where your project files are saved.
Look in %USERPROFILE%\Documents\Visual Studio 2010\Projects.
|
|
|
|
|
Here is the exact path where (project name) is the project name :
%USERPROFILE%\Documents\Visual Studio 2010\Projects\(project name)\bin\debug\
|
|
|
|
|
Build a solution, you will find the exe file in the output folder. If you want to build the exe file from command line then there is a command line utility csc.exe to make an exe file from cs file.
Refer http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/78f4aasd.aspx[^] for the same.
Hope this helps.
All the best.
I quit being afraid when my first venture failed and the sky didn't fall down.
|
|
|
|
|
If you have to ask you're in the wrong career. Perhaps something in sales would better suit you.
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
|
|
|
|
|
You need to invoke the compiler csc.exe.
You can do this via Visual Studio directly by using the Build menu option or via the command line[^].
Too much of heaven can bring you underground
Heaven can always turn around
Too much of heaven, our life is all hell bound
Heaven, the kill that makes no sound
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
