4 ms·

Not one of the above has actually improved the product we produce You didn't see an improvement from early versions of .NET to later versions? No improvement f

Not one of the above has actually improved the product we produce You didn't see an improvement from early versions of .NET to later versions? No improvement from WebForms to ASP.NET MVC? I have a very hard time believing that. The system is SO MUCH more mature than it used to be.

tonyedgecombe 12y ago
I think the point is the end user doesn't see any of the benefits when they are using your application.
- NicoJuicy 12y ago
  The difference between webforms and MVC was huge... (no more postbacks) But i think Microsoft is slowly finding the correct way of doing things and yes, there is a lot of influence of NodeJS (Owin) and RoR (Scaffolders). But it's easier to change between the same platform (and still using C#), then changing between web technologies. The above user wasn't required to switch to Silverlight, some web applications in my company still use Asp.Net 1.0 and it still works (not my projects, thank god)
- MartinCron 12y ago
  Good point, I'm thinking in terms of code quality, which can be seriously improved by using newer language features. I mean, you could write C# without using generics or LINQ or extension methods or a dozen other meaningful improvements, but I can't imagine someone doing so on purpose.
  - bananas 12y ago
    LINQ isn't a magic bullet. collection.Where(s=>s.Transaction.Amount < 100).OrderBy(s=>s.Name).Single(); I'll let you debug the intermittent NullReferenceException that threw in production with no PDBs...
    - MartinCron 12y ago
      But look at how concise and readable that is!
    - Bognar 12y ago
      You would get a null reference exception if you unrolled that into a loop, too. You should know what your data is going to look like and if any elements could be null or not. Don't blame LINQ for your lack of null checking.
      - bananas 12y ago
        Yep but you'd know which dereference it was if you unrolled it. Nulls happen unfortunately even with the best checking and intents.
        nyrina 12y ago
        Nulls happen, that's why you use the best checking. It's not the best checking if you get thrown NullReferenceExceptions
        bananas 12y ago
        Definitely but that gurantee is thrown away the moment you pull a 3rd party black box in. I'm suggesting it's feasible but not necessarily perfect and when it does go boom, which it does when you have 100 million HTTP hits a day, you need to be able to find out precisely where it went wrong. LINQ makes that damn hard: NullReferenceException Company.Product.Assembly.Namespace.Type.Method() +14 ... When line 14 has 22 dereferences then you have no idea why it broke.

tonyedgecombe 12y ago

I think the point is the end user doesn't see any of the benefits when they are using your application.

NicoJuicy 12y ago
The difference between webforms and MVC was huge... (no more postbacks) But i think Microsoft is slowly finding the correct way of doing things and yes, there is a lot of influence of NodeJS (Owin) and RoR (Scaffolders). But it's easier to change between the same platform (and still using C#), then changing between web technologies. The above user wasn't required to switch to Silverlight, some web applications in my company still use Asp.Net 1.0 and it still works (not my projects, thank god)
MartinCron 12y ago
Good point, I'm thinking in terms of code quality, which can be seriously improved by using newer language features. I mean, you could write C# without using generics or LINQ or extension methods or a dozen other meaningful improvements, but I can't imagine someone doing so on purpose.
- bananas 12y ago
  LINQ isn't a magic bullet. collection.Where(s=>s.Transaction.Amount < 100).OrderBy(s=>s.Name).Single(); I'll let you debug the intermittent NullReferenceException that threw in production with no PDBs...
  - MartinCron 12y ago
    But look at how concise and readable that is!
  - Bognar 12y ago
    You would get a null reference exception if you unrolled that into a loop, too. You should know what your data is going to look like and if any elements could be null or not. Don't blame LINQ for your lack of null checking.
    - bananas 12y ago
      Yep but you'd know which dereference it was if you unrolled it. Nulls happen unfortunately even with the best checking and intents.
      - nyrina 12y ago
        Nulls happen, that's why you use the best checking. It's not the best checking if you get thrown NullReferenceExceptions
        bananas 12y ago
        Definitely but that gurantee is thrown away the moment you pull a 3rd party black box in. I'm suggesting it's feasible but not necessarily perfect and when it does go boom, which it does when you have 100 million HTTP hits a day, you need to be able to find out precisely where it went wrong. LINQ makes that damn hard: NullReferenceException Company.Product.Assembly.Namespace.Type.Method() +14 ... When line 14 has 22 dereferences then you have no idea why it broke.