Huh?

[Homeloaf]

Just to sound like a complete ignoramus...

What is .NET?

I hear about it everywhere. I have a vague grasp, but haven't the slightest clue at the particulars!

Much thx to those who could shed a dim ray of light upon the subject that creates an abscess on my programming soul...

[earlofqb]

Well, .NET is Microsoft's new toy in programming. It's like the regular visual studio, but on steroids and with everything linked.

All the languages now have a similar syntax, something I hate. Programming in VB.NET is like writing in pseudo-C, but at least you get the benefit of "greater power" (at the cost of none of the code making sense to anyone but someone who has a good bit of C programming knowledge).

Also, you have all the "fun" of some really cryptic stuff when you create a new object (using the various quick methods such as dragging-and-dropping controls on a form, inserting code snippits, etc). That "by val e as integer" stuff makes no sense to me, and that's just the start of the crypticness.

Anyway, enough of what I hate about it. I enjoy the power VB now has. It (with a little help and some really messed up programming methods reminiscient of assembler interrupts and whatnot) now can compete fully with C and all the other .NET languages. It does this because the code you write doesn't compile completely to binary. Rather, it's compiled to an intermediate language called the CLR (Common Language Runtime). This is then compiled whenever the program is "executed" using the JIT doo-hickey (JIT = Just In Time, it's MS's lame name for "when you click the "executable", it'll compile the program, presumably optomising it for your system (yeah, right) and supposedly allowing portability (sure, let's go with that. I've never once seen a .NET program run on anything other than a Windows system)).

The entire concept of .NET is to integrate all the languages completely and allow some form of portability. Unfortunately, the portability hasn't been demonstrated because 99% of people who want portable apps write in Java. However, the integration is pretty well done, although it is beyond me how it works (obviously, I know what's compiled and whatnot via the CLR and JIT, just not how a programmer would do that (combine VB code with C++ code with C#, etc)). The speed is uniform throughout the languages because, as I said above, the code is all compiled to CLR code (which is, again, pretty much MS's version of translating the code into some form of "universal" assembly code), unfortunately I've a feeling that a .NET program would probably execute a lot slower than anything pre-.NET, for the simple fact that .NET checks everything as it happens (which I presume would also fill your memory up fairly quickly). I'll stop there, because what I've started into is pure speculation (to be honest, I still use QB and VB6 for most of my BASIC coding, and use Dev-C++ for my C/C++ coding).

From what I've read in books (I've done surprisingly little .NET coding compared to the rest of the stuff I do), .NET's supposed to be good, but all I ever hear about is the bad stuff. Anything else you want to know (I have a full stack of books on .NET, and I myself don't understand a lot of it. In fact, in one of my books (Visual Basic .NET Power Tools), the author even admits that despite programming in .NET for 3+ years, he still doesn't know much about it), and I'll look it up either online or in one of my many, thick, books (smallest one is 200 pages)?

[Homeloaf]

Good golly, Miss Early... (Didn't quite work, did it?)

I'm terribly curious about learning C/C++. Any suggestions on where I could find a swell compiler? Any tutorials you could swing my way?

[Ildûrest]

earlofqb said:

That "by val e as integer" stuff makes no sense to me, and that's just the start of the crypticness.

You obviously need to learn more C -- not that I ever thought VB was a healthy descendant of BASIC and this sounds like an even bigger deviation.

earlofqb said:

now can compete fully with C and all the other .NET languages.

So can FreeBasic and it's got a lot less bullsh--.

earlofqb said:

supposedly allowing portability (sure, let's go with that. I've never once seen a .NET program run on anything other than a Windows system)).

There are definitely implementations of the .NET framework for Linux and Mac though they are obviously less complete than the one that runs on Windows.

earlofqb said:

99% of people who want portable apps write in Java.

Actually I'd say more are written in C/C++. Well, the programs binaries themselves don't work on multiple systems, but the applications can be compiled for various systems.

earlofqb said:

However, the integration is pretty well done, although it is beyond me how it works (obviously, I know what's compiled and whatnot via the CLR and JIT, just not how a programmer would do that (combine VB code with C++ code with C#, etc)).

Makes perfect sense to me. Calling functions written in other languages is no problem because all the languages produce identical bytecode anyway.

earlofqb said:

unfortunately I've a feeling that a .NET program would probably execute a lot slower than anything pre-.NET, for the simple fact that .NET checks everything as it happens (which I presume would also fill your memory up fairly quickly).

I'm not sure it'd be MUCH slower, but I think .NET could never beat a well-written, optimised C program. Memory and resource use would be quite a bit higher though, I expect.

homeloaf said:

Good golly, Miss Early... (Didn't quite work, did it?)

I'm terribly curious about learning C/C++. Any suggestions on where I could find a swell compiler? Any tutorials you could swing my way?

earlofqb said:

(to be honest, I still use QB and VB6 for most of my BASIC coding, and use Dev-C++ for my C/C++ coding)

I would also suggest Dev-C++. (http://www.bloodshed.net/) As for tutorials, I'd like to write one, but there isn't one yet. I'm working on a QB tutorial at the moment. Anyway I'll add you on AIM...

[Homeloaf]

Pues, no puedo usar mi AIM.

Estoy tomando Espanol.

Well, I can't use my AIM account.

I'm taking Spanish.

The reason I can't use my AIM account is that, for some reason, it never works. I don't use AOL, so it is the suck. I have to use AIM express if I really need to, but it is slooooooooow on dial-up.

[Mikrondel]

LOL @"AIM express == slow"

Would Yahoo be better?

[Homeloaf]

I am, again, not able to access my Yahoo account. No idea why. When the full moon is out and I have buried three chickens in the graveyard underneath the big oak, it works %50 of the time.