5 ms·
Actually, this is great even with all the rough edges. You know why? It makes it really simple to test some part of C# in a tiny program if you don't know what
by Cymen 15y ago
Actually, this is great even with all the rough edges. You know why? It makes it really simple to test some part of C# in a tiny program if you don't know what you're doing very well. Where I am we all use VS to develop websites and it's a hassle to fire up C# express, create a project and build it for a quick test program. I am familiar with msbuild (have it working great with msdeploy on a continuous integration server) but for small things this would be great with of course a bit more cleanup.
I see the name STFU more like instead of having a long (or short) email exchange about how to do something just whip out STFU and do a quick bit of coding to test out your idea.
- eropple 15y ago"Actually", it doesn't make it really simple to do that at all. This is considerably more complex than copying a 'build all in directory' build file in and running msbuild on it. (Such a build file is the moral equivalent of the generic makefile that most C/C++ programmers have in their back pocket.) And even tiny bits of code often need to be able to things that are rather basic within the framework. Importing System.* assemblies, for example. Still smells like a solution looking for a problem.
- Cymen 15y agoI just tried it and it was simple enough to use. After using it though I agree -- I'd prefer my own rolled batch file as it has conventions built in that aren't to my taste. By importing System.* assemblies do you mean automatically adding some boiler plate "using System.*"?
- eropple 15y agoI meant making assembly references. I tried it with System.Drawing and csc complained about not being able to find it. System.dll isn't enough to really stand up anything that isn't very trivial.
- darkxanthos 15y agoExactly. We're on the same page. :)
- eropple 15y agoThe page of "not doing anything notable or material, but talking up a storm"? I mean, what else can be drawn from submitting 70 lines of broken code to HN? To be honest, you'd be better off writing that msbuild file mentioned upthread instead of trying to jump on some silly "STFU and code" bandwagon. Unlike this, you can do useful stuff even with a very trivial msbuild file. And you only have to write it once. And it'll actually work.
- dschobel 15y agoIn VS: Debug -> Windows -> Immediate voila, C# REPL! great for testing out code snippets
- timrobinson 15y ago"test some part of C#" - Snippet Compiler already works well for this, if you don't want to start Visual Studio. Snippet Compiler isn't broken, though, like STFU is. For instance, I have the .NET framework in C:\WINNT. Besides, for command line use, how hard is it to: 1. Start menu, Visual Studio Command Prompt 2. vim temp.cs 3. csc temp.exe 4. temp.exe
- Cymen 15y agoIs Snippet Compiler stuck at .net 3.5 though? I'm looking here: http://www.sliver.com/dotnet/SnippetCompiler/ http://www.sliver.com/dotnet/SnippetCompiler/ I tried it with default parameters and it looks like no go.
- SonicSoul 15y agoi have a test console app ready for that reason.. combined with slick run, i can open it with a few key strokes and be coding in seconds. also why would you want to miss out on all the helpful vs tools like intellisense, refactoring, code snippets ? What about the awesome feature in vs that will auto add the namespace for any classes you declare (ctrl+.)? this thing seems like a poor solution to a problem that barely exists.
- darkxanthos 15y agoYou said the conventions aren't quite to your tastes.. what specifically? I'd love to correct it.
- Cymen 15y agoIt's really minor things like the src and bin directories. I could come to like it that way but if it really is a small chunk of code I'd probably keep the .cs and .exe in the same directory. But that is really minor. The other thing (which people might really not like) that I'd use is copying in a main.cs when doing "stfu new" that has some boiler plate code in there. I'd also display the command options when no input is specified. I do like the idea in practice -- it's simple but useful. It is also short enough that tweaking it to meet my own needs couldn't be simpler. I'll play with it some more.
- j_s 15y agohttp://www.linqpad.net/ http://www.linqpad.net/ is fairly useful to test c# snippets, if a bit bloated. There is also the F# interactive window if you're poking into the BCL while in Visual Studio.
- eropple 15y agoIf you've got Mono around, there's the interactive C# shell there too. (I think it actually works in .NET as well but I haven't tested it lately.)