|
Almost all of them, provided they do not have multiple exclamation marks, the words "for dummies" or the word "in x days" in the title.
Have a look the the Wrox[^] selection, or Addison-Wesley[^]
Ideological Purity is no substitute for being able to stick your thumb down a pipe to stop the water
|
|
|
|
|
CLR via C# is a very good book if you want to spend learning more time about the internals of the .Net framework (rather than the programming language itself).
|
|
|
|
|
What I really want is a Reference Guide to the actual codings thanks
|
|
|
|
|
The MSDN C# Language Reference[^] is all you need, then. Most pages have sample code, as well.
Whew! I had to click twice - once to get to Google, and the other to get the page - to find that for you. I'm pooped... time for bed.
Will Rogers never met me.
|
|
|
|
|
I go with Abhinav, CLR via C# is still best book for me. If you do not have concept clear, example does less of purpose.
// ♫ 99 little bugs in the code,
// 99 bugs in the code
// We fix a bug, compile it again
// 101 little bugs in the code ♫
|
Tell your manager, while you code: "good, cheap or fast: pick two. "
|
|
|
|
|
Go for the Nutshell book - see my post (and the one before mine) in this thread.
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
When this came up a month ago or so (again), I did a bit of research and found an excellent book. In fact, I bought it myself. The OP that time was looking for a book that included exercises and answers, just like a real textbook, and this one has them. The one thing it lacks, which might be a good thing for a beginner, is much coverage of data access. Although that's most of what I want to master, lengthy discussions of ADO really detract from learning the fundamentals of the language, and are better left to specialty books. It does an outstanding job of teaching the essentials of the language, and is specifically targeted for Visual Studio development for Windows. Although I've been writing functional, if not fancy, apps in C# for years, I've learned a bunch from this text, and hope to spend some quality time with it soon.
It's published by Wrox Press (unsurprising, as they produce some of the best programming books available, consistently), and entitled "Beginning Visual C# 2010." The ISBN is 978-0-470-50226-6, and it's available at Amazon. It's also dirt cheap.
Will Rogers never met me.
|
|
|
|
|
Jeffery Richter's book
Applied Microsoft.NET framework programming
CLR via C#
Best according to me...
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've found the C# 4 Nutshell[^] book to be an excellent reference. 
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
The "In a Nutshell" books from O'Reilly are fantastic, as has been mentioned. They're great if you want a mixture of reference/examples. They cover a huge number of the libraries in the .NET framework, and also have great little example applications you can try too. Definitely worth having in your library.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm going to go slightly different here and recommend Jon Skeet's C# in Depth book. Have a look at Jon's site here[^].
|
|
|
|
|
Here are a few books that might assist you:
1. Sams Fluent CSharp 2011
2. Cengage C# Programming 2010 by Barbara Doyle
3. Microsoft Press Visual C# 2010 Step by Step
1. Is aimed at those with some .net, visual basic, C# exposure and speaks in patterns and english.
2. Is straightforward Application tutorial using C#
3. Is a comprehensive tutorial for beginners, one I reccomend.
.
|
|
|
|
|
O'Reilly is having a sale on 40 books 50% off which lasts until midnight 6/14.
1. the "In a nutshell" for C# 5 is listed (mentioned by other posters)
2. C# 5 pocket reference
3. Head First C#
4. Programming C#5
I haven't read any of them, but maybe someone else can comment on them specifically? (and #2 is a reference which you indicated an interest in)
http://shop.oreilly.com/category/deals/teched-celebration.do?imm_mid=08aa90&cmp=em-npa-books-videos-celebration-teched-direct[^]
discount code = CFTECHED
Oh, and the pages says "Save 50% - In Celebration of TechEd North America" so I don't think I'm giving out a secret by passing on the code.
(And no, I didn't get it from anyone at TechEd either  )
HTH
|
|
|
|
|
I have my web site ready for my UI person to pretty it up.
All I have left to do is write the web service for it so other web sites can use it.
I didn't think it would be this puzzling since I had seen that option before as a project template and I understand (at a high level at least) what SOAP is.
I've already coded using the web site with Entity Framework (which requires the .NET Framework 4.0) and the only web service examples I have been able to dig up say 'pick Framework 3.5' in the instructions.
As many articles as I've looked at I must be missing something. There has to be a way to do this without rewriting my search in Framework 3.5, right?
All I want to do is either return 0 or more records which have four strings (each) based on search criteria, or return a detail record if an id is passed.
So, it looks like EF4 is my brick wall.
Any hints how to go through/around it?
TIA,
-Chris C.
|
|
|
|
|
To create webservice in .Net 4.0, you need to create an asp.net web application project and then add a "web service" new item. With WCF in hand, do you really want to do that?
WCF can do much more than web service and faster.
// ♫ 99 little bugs in the code,
// 99 bugs in the code
// We fix a bug, compile it again
// 101 little bugs in the code ♫
|
Tell your manager, while you code: "good, cheap or fast: pick two. "
|
|
|
|
|
I'll start with that thanks!
> With WCF in hand, do you really want to do that?
And... I can take a hint, so I've done some quick reading about how WCF is a 'service framework' and why that's superior to a web service (don't need a web server).
But one (possibly stupid) question:
Can it act as a Web Service? (I know it can run on a web server but that might not be the same thing)
This is only a critical question because the specification (written by a contractor that is no longer here) calls for a web service.
TIA,
-Chris C.
|
|
|
|
|
jccompton43 wrote: Can it act as a Web Service? (
Yes. WCF is largely transport agnostic. The same code can serve up different transport types, merely by changing configuration, so you could have the same code simultaneously serving up via named pipes, TCP and HTTP without changing a single line of code.
|
|
|
|
|
See exactly what you want, if you have applications in other operating system using this service, better go ahead with webservice, otherwise, go with WCF, as in terms of performance, the webservice can't beat.
You also have lot of flexibility in WCF 
|
|
|
|
|
I hope I don't bother anyone with my simple and newbie-look-a-like questions The title itself is clearly indicating what I want for the answer. So thanks for your help
|
|
|
|
|
In non technical teams the stack is an optimized memory bank that is very fast. The heap is a memory bank that isn't as fast but great for handling objects of varying sizes. So when you create an object, .NET looks to see if it is a native or reference type. If it is a native type, the value it put on the stack, otherwise it is put on the heap.
The reason for this is that the stack only handles objects that are 32 bits in size. The fact that all memory allocations are the same size is what makes it fast. Also it's not a pointer to a value that is stored, it's the actual value itself. Because of this Boolean values actually occupy 4 bytes of memory. Native types like doubles are stored in 2 x 4 bytes
A reference type like a string for example could be any size. It could also be very large. So what happens is the string is stored on the heap and a pointer is created and put on the stack so it can be found quickly. Either way, the combination offers a lot faster solution than a simple memory model.
"You get that on the big jobs."
|
|
|
|
|
Reason for my vote of one: (and I suspect for the others) Wrong. It is so completely wrong, that there is almost nothing in there that is actually correct.
I don't often give down votes, but I'm making an exception in this case!
Sorry, but you really need to go back to the beginning and start learning this stuff again.
Ideological Purity is no substitute for being able to stick your thumb down a pipe to stop the water
|
|
|
|
|
I read Jeffrey Richter's book on CLR but I must have totally misunderstood what I was reading. Hopefully someone will explain the difference in this topic. At the moment I'm aware I've got it wrong. I just don't know why.
"You get that on the big jobs."
|
|
|
|
|
I understand what you are trying to say but I didn't have another choice and I thought this is the right place to ask that problem. I already excused for my question you consider non-advanced and unprofessional . I hope you realize why. 
|
|
|
|
|
You do realise that OG wasn't addressing you don't you? What he was saying is that the answer you were given was wrong - not that you were stupid for asking the question. It's actually a pretty fair question, as the concepts are misunderstood, which you can see from the answers.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
