4 ms·

Wow, that article is full of all sorts of stupid. Someone should tell the author that .NET is not a language (not that it'll make a difference). I find this pa

by jschrf 16y ago

Wow, that article is full of all sorts of stupid. Someone should tell the author that .NET is not a language (not that it'll make a difference). I find this part particularly hilarious: "However, if you need to make a 1.7 oz burger, you simply can’t. There’s no button for it. The patties are pre-formed in the wrong size. They start out frozen so they can’t be smushed up and reformed, and the thawing machine is so tightly integrated with the cooking machine that there’s no way to intercept it between the two." Pure silliness. Perfect example of an irrational language bias.

bdclimber14 16y ago
In the author's defense, it's not like he outlandishly says ".net is a language" -- it's fairly common to refer to the framework when discussing stacks because of specificity. Saying "I program Rails apps" is clear, and Ruby is assumed. Technically, I don't "program in Rails" is if it was a language, but since the knowledge needed to effectively work with a framework is so involved, it's worth stating.
Hominem 16y ago
I had a lot of problems with that article as well. But I'd still like the give the author the benefit of the doubt. I assume he has very narrow experience with some framework like webforms or ran into some developers who did. With a lot of microsoft's frameworks it is easy to get stuck at a simple problem with no obvious solution, and conclude that there is no possible way to do it within that framework. Most of the time if you keep digging , you will find that there usually is a simple, elegant way to solve your problem but many people just give up, and decide that Microsoft just sucks.
- notJim 16y ago
  I've had a lot of the problems of the sort that you describe (particularly with ASP.Net MVC), and I've found that while there are always solutions, the solutions are often very difficult to find. And even harder to find (at least for my company) are people who have the experience to already know what those solutions are.

by jschrf 16y ago

bdclimber14 16y ago

In the author's defense, it's not like he outlandishly says ".net is a language" -- it's fairly common to refer to the framework when discussing stacks because of specificity. Saying "I program Rails apps" is clear, and Ruby is assumed. Technically, I don't "program in Rails" is if it was a language, but since the knowledge needed to effectively work with a framework is so involved, it's worth stating.

Hominem 16y ago

I had a lot of problems with that article as well. But I'd still like the give the author the benefit of the doubt. I assume he has very narrow experience with some framework like webforms or ran into some developers who did. With a lot of microsoft's frameworks it is easy to get stuck at a simple problem with no obvious solution, and conclude that there is no possible way to do it within that framework. Most of the time if you keep digging , you will find that there usually is a simple, elegant way to solve your problem but many people just give up, and decide that Microsoft just sucks.

notJim 16y ago
I've had a lot of the problems of the sort that you describe (particularly with ASP.Net MVC), and I've found that while there are always solutions, the solutions are often very difficult to find. And even harder to find (at least for my company) are people who have the experience to already know what those solutions are.