|
I think we could get by with 4 packs of hot dogs and 5 packs of buns. 38 friends. I will have two please.
|
|
|
|
|
Until they meet, they aren't talking to each other.
|
|
|
|
|
Oscar Meyer Angus Selects are 8/package...
|
|
|
|
|
 You are the man. That has the potential to send posts to the Abyss!
You should have really gone for a clear YATCITA!
Starting to think people post kid pics in their profiles because that was the last time they were cute - Jeremy.
|
|
|
|
|
YATCITA?
Cheers,
Mike Fidler
"I intend to live forever - so far, so good." Steven Wright
"I almost had a psychic girlfriend but she left me before we met." Also Steven Wright
"I'm addicted to placebos. I could quit, but it wouldn't matter." Steven Wright yet again.
|
|
|
|
|
Yet Another Thread Careening Into The Abyss.
Especially when it contains a bit of objectionalble materials 
Starting to think people post kid pics in their profiles because that was the last time they were cute - Jeremy.
|
|
|
|
|
Cheers,
Mike Fidler
"I intend to live forever - so far, so good." Steven Wright
"I almost had a psychic girlfriend but she left me before we met." Also Steven Wright
"I'm addicted to placebos. I could quit, but it wouldn't matter." Steven Wright yet again.
|
|
|
|
|
What would the replacement be?
Web API, maybe?
WCF works extremely well for exposing remote methods in your services.
Yes, it was previously clogged up with config information but now it's a lot better.
It works well and is extremely easy to implement. Why would it be dead, unless there is some simpler replacement?
|
|
|
|
|
I've been looking into SignalR. Very simple and it could be a WCF replacement.
If it's not broken, fix it until it is
|
|
|
|
|
Kevin Marois wrote: I've been looking into SignalR
SignalR is very interesting.
|
|
|
|
|
As far as I know SignalR is something completely different.
SignalR supports two way HTTP(S) requests using web sockets.
WCF supports all sorts of communication (through configuration), like HTTP(S), pipes, SOAP, and can, in theory, be used on any host (IIS/WAS, Windows Service, do we have any other flavors?).
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
I bought a book on it.[^]
I'm about half way through it. It uses the best method it can to maintain a connection, based on that platform you're running it on. Web Sockets is one.
I'm a fan of WCF, but it can be a real PITA to configure. What I like about SignalR over WCF is that it's stupid simple to set up and maintain.
If it's not broken, fix it until it is
|
|
|
|
|
Nice, seems SignalR does more than I thought.
Going to check it out for sure
|
|
|
|
|
Yup but still I think, WCF vs SignalR is not the right comparison to do. WCF is the bigger brother. It's a platform. A platform that's getting eclipsed by the recent Asp.net MVC Web APIs. Sadly WCF would fade out from so many day-to-day applications.
Starting to think people post kid pics in their profiles because that was the last time they were cute - Jeremy.
|
|
|
|
|
Sander Rossel wrote: and can, in theory, be used on any host (IIS/WAS, Windows Service, do we have any other flavors?).
Selfhosted.
|
|
|
|
|
Absolutely, much less named pipes and many different forms of authentication.
WCF is a bit like XML or Microsoft Office. It can do sooooo much more than most people realize or what most people use it for. When you need it, it's really nice, but often difficult to learn and master.
I've been hearing people calling RoR and jQuery dead, but I still find myself using jQuery once in a while.
|
|
|
|
|
raddevus wrote: It works well and is extremely easy to implement.
Easy you say. I recently picked up a copy of Programming WCF Services and I was suffering from information overload by the end of the first chapter. The shear volume of what can be done in WCF and granularity of the configuration settings can be a little overwhelming when looking at it for the first time. I myself thought that building a service application would be relatively easy until I started reading this book. Now I am a little apprehensive about taking the plunge without further study.
if (Object.DividedByZero == true) { Universe.Implode(); }
Meus ratio ex fortis machina. Simplicitatis de formae ac munus. -Foothill, 2016
|
|
|
|
|
I was thinking along the lines of this simple example:
Walkthrough: Creating a simple WCF Service in Windows Forms[^]
Yes, the technology is huge. It's quite amazing what it does to solve one of the most long-living architectural problems throughout computing history (IPC, RPC, RMI, Remoting, CORBA, DCOM, Web Services, Web API, REST).
|
|
|
|
|
I've been through that tutorial before and that's what made me think it would simple. I also wanted to read professional level material so I could build WCF services that would thrive in an Enterprise environment where reliability, security, and the ability to scale must all be addressed. I am picturing my brain as a smoldering pile of ash once I get done learning all of this
if (Object.DividedByZero == true) { Universe.Implode(); }
Meus ratio ex fortis machina. Simplicitatis de formae ac munus. -Foothill, 2016
|
|
|
|
|
Foothill wrote: I am picturing my brain as a smoldering pile of ash once I get done learning all of this
You are a lucky one then.
The rest of us had our brains melt and run out our ears.
|
|
|
|
|
Foothill wrote: I was suffering from information overload by the end of the first chapter
That's what I often dislike about books and what I try to avoid in my own writing.
Why can't we start out making a really simple service (like the example you get when you create a new WCF project) and go from there?
Nowhere along the way should you feel overwhelmed. In fact, you should feel like the book (or blog) just gave you enough information to confidently start experimenting on your own!
Explain something like Miffy[^] would do without losing any depth on the subject!
|
|
|
|
|
I was kind of hoping for it to start with: here is the absolute minimum you need for a WCF service to run; now let's show you all the fun things you can do. Alas, the book reads more like technical documentation. If I wanted a sleep aid, I would browse over to the RFC standards archives. I find the text for RFC 822 especially riveting  
if (Object.DividedByZero == true) { Universe.Implode(); }
Meus ratio ex fortis machina. Simplicitatis de formae ac munus. -Foothill, 2016
|
|
|
|
|
Oh! That looks interzzzzzz...
|
|
|
|
|
Does it matter? You can still use it.
|
|
|
|
|
It is my "opinion" that these people don't know how to use WCF (or other technology) and don't wish to learn, therefore the technology is now dead. Like a miracle the technology is now dead. It was there a minute ago, but now it is gone.
Whatever, WCF is great when used correctly and like others have said, it has gotten better.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
