|
That's y go back to c.Cool same loops, same things year after year
|
|
|
|
|
Member 4134890 wrote: .NET? Moving too fast? Hell yes
yeah 5 versions(+ service packs) in 7 years
|
|
|
|
|
2.0 or higher is the way to go. 3.5 if the people have it. 1.1 or lower is like being stuck in Visual Basic 1.0 for DOS.
"What's everyone so worked up about? So there's a comet -- big deal. It'll burn up in our atmosphere and what's ever left will be no bigger than a chihuahua's head." - Homer Simpson
|
|
|
|
|
3.5 seems to leak as much as that mess of 1.1 really did.
The problem is with the word: seems.
It is actually the impact it has, by-design.
Oh, my, days..
|
|
|
|
|
Shouldn't the list be in some logical order?
|
|
|
|
|
The order of the list seems to be the ranking of the answers, as they are the same. I think I would prefer that the list pre-vote should not show up in the order of the voting just because knowing ahead of time what is ranked higher may affect someone's vote on some things.
Then again, maybe the order is just coincidentally the same!
|
|
|
|
|
... but expect to switch to 8.0 soon 
|
|
|
|
|
Good for you! I'm glad someone is out there, living on the edge, developing dangerously!
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire!
Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)!
SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0
0 rows returned
Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
VCF Blog
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jim Crafton wrote: Good for you! I'm glad someone is out there, living on the edge, developing dangerously!
I don't even write code anymore. I just stare at the IDE and it gets written for me.
|
|
|
|
|
Chuck Norris? Why did you change your name? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bloody Mac users....
regards,
Paul Watson
Ireland & South Africa
Fernando A. Gomez F. wrote: At least he achieved immortality for a few years.
|
|
|
|
|
 Good one.
|
|
|
|
|
In Framework 3.5, i find the datatype "var" especially in LINQ samples, does this mean we are going back to the good old (or bad old) days of Visual Basic VB6 and earlier when any and every variable was of type Object.
I have been involved in converting some VB6 apps to .NET and its been a tough job finding out the actual datatype and moreover you cannot use the handy Property Browser facility.
|
|
|
|
|
var has its place, but the potential for misuse is very high, even among CodeProjectors.
I say, if you know the type, use the type; var is for when you don't or can't know the type.
|
|
|
|
|
var is NOT the same as a Variant from the old VB days. It is a statically inferred type that remains that type through the duration of its scope. It is not like the old VB variant where the compiler had to leave enough "space" for whatever type of variable you put in. This kind of typing has been done for years successfully in functional languages like scheme and ocaml.
|
|
|
|
|
Gadbad Singh wrote: does this mean we are going back to the good old (or bad old) days of Visual Basic VB6 and earlier when any and every variable was of type Object.
Not at all. var is just an unfortunate keyword for type inference[^], which is very different from dynamic typing with variants.
|
|
|
|
|
Wasn't there some rumbling about putting this in C++0xx sometime within the next millennium?
¡El diablo está en mis pantalones! ¡Mire, mire!
Real Mentats use only 100% pure, unfooled around with Sapho Juice(tm)!
SELECT * FROM User WHERE Clue > 0
0 rows returned
Save an Orange - Use the VCF!
VCF Blog
|
|
|
|
|
Jim Crafton wrote: Wasn't there some rumbling about putting this in C++0xx sometime
Yes, but the keyword is different[^]
Jim Crafton wrote: within the next millennium?
 Blessing and curse of a mature and standardized language - changes come slowly.
|
|
|
|
|
It would have been better if they'd come up with a different keyword. I've seen lots of confusion over it - even if it's only short-lived confusion.
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
That question has been answered so many times that is getting bored.
var != VB6VariantObjectType
|
|
|
|
|
why are you getting so "bored"  , i have not said that
var != VB6VariantObjectType
i just mentioned that var is similar to Object in C# or VB which is way too confusing when it comes to guessing the underlying datatype, something similar to var used in scripting langugage jscript used in in html files.
|
|
|
|
|
It's not like object as the compiler does check for it's type. If it were an object the compiler would eat it if you assigned a string first and an integer later. variables declared as var can be quite useful when working with anonymous types in LINQ queries, in fact it is required.
WM.
What about weapons of mass-construction?
"What? Its an Apple MacBook Pro. They are sexy!" - Paul Watson
My blog
|
|
|
|
|
Read the docu about the var KEYWORD (see other comments) it's not RTTI... It's main use is for very long type names like "List<list><someobj>>>"
But the compiler "knows" the type at compile-time - so everything keeps strongly typed.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
