c-sharp

[windandwaves]

Hi Folk

I am a PHP programmer, but I like to learn c-sharp as it seems to be
in hot demand around here. My questions are:

- how does c-sharp relate to PHP
- do you like c-sharp and its cousins
- are there better things to do then c-sharp?

Thanks a million

Nicolaas

[KDawg44]

Re: c-sharp

On Mar 7, 4:40 pm, "windandwav es" <nfranc...@gmai l.comwrote:

Hi Folk
>
I am a PHP programmer, but I like to learn c-sharp as it seems to be
in hot demand around here. My questions are:
>
- how does c-sharp relate to PHP
- do you like c-sharp and its cousins
- are there better things to do then c-sharp?
>
Thanks a million
>

Nicolaas

c# is very similar to Java, moreso than it is to PHP

[tomb]

Re: c-sharp

windandwaves wrote:

Hi Folk
>
I am a PHP programmer, but I like to learn c-sharp as it seems to be
in hot demand around here. My questions are:
>
- how does c-sharp relate to PHP
- do you like c-sharp and its cousins
- are there better things to do then c-sharp?
>
Thanks a million
>
>

>Nicolaas
>>

>
>

C# runs on Windows servers, php is superior for small web applications,
java is uperior for large web applications. Many things are better than
c#. I am currently a windows programmer, trying to get away from it
because so many other things are so much better.

T

[Tim Roberts]

Re: c-sharp

tomb <tomb@technetce nter.comwrote:

>
>windandwaves wrote:

>>
>I am a PHP programmer, but I like to learn c-sharp as it seems to be
>in hot demand around here. My questions are:
>>
>- how does c-sharp relate to PHP

Not at all, except that it's possible to write web applications in both. C#
is also commonly used to write non-web applications, whereas PHP is not
(commonly, that is).

>- do you like c-sharp and its cousins

Our opinions are not really very relevant. The big advantage of C# and
Visual Basic is the .NET runtime, which provides a HUGE library of canned
functionality.

>- are there better things to do then c-sharp?

That question cannot be answered. If you've read any job postings
recently, then it should be clear that C# is a very good thing to have on
your resume.

>C# runs on Windows servers,

Not true. Mono provides a very good C# run-time on Linux.

>php is superior for small web applications,

....in your opinion.

>java is uperior for large web applications.

....in your opinion. I would disagree.

>Many things are better than c#. I am currently a windows programmer, trying to get away from it
>because so many other things are so much better.

Regardless of what you think about it, I would point out that many people
have gone bankrupt by betting against Microsoft.
--
Tim Roberts, timr@probo.com
Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.

[Jerry Stuckle]

Re: c-sharp

Tim Roberts wrote:

tomb <tomb@technetce nter.comwrote:

>windandwaves wrote:

>>I am a PHP programmer, but I like to learn c-sharp as it seems to be
>>in hot demand around here. My questions are:
>>>
>>- how does c-sharp relate to PHP

>
Not at all, except that it's possible to write web applications in both. C#
is also commonly used to write non-web applications, whereas PHP is not
(commonly, that is).
>

Actually, I've seen *a lot* of non-web scripts written in PHP. Written
a few hundred myself, also.

>>- do you like c-sharp and its cousins

>
Our opinions are not really very relevant. The big advantage of C# and
Visual Basic is the .NET runtime, which provides a HUGE library of canned
functionality.
>

>>- are there better things to do then c-sharp?

>
That question cannot be answered. If you've read any job postings
recently, then it should be clear that C# is a very good thing to have on
your resume.
>

Depends on the job postings you watch. For instance, here in DC there
are very few openings for C# programmers listed. A lot for C/C++, though.

>C# runs on Windows servers,

>
Not true. Mono provides a very good C# run-time on Linux.
>

It's an emulation - and always behind the times. It takes a while for
Mono to catch up with any changes in the language, for instance.

>php is superior for small web applications,

>
...in your opinion.
>

And mine and a few hundred others here on this newsgroup. Versus one
opinion to the contrary - yours.

>java is uperior for large web applications.

>
...in your opinion. I would disagree.
>

Sorry, I agree here, also. Java is much superior for large web
applications. And if you knew Java you would agree. But obviously
you've never done any serious apps in Java.

>Many things are better than c#. I am currently a windows programmer, trying to get away from it
>because so many other things are so much better.

>
Regardless of what you think about it, I would point out that many people
have gone bankrupt by betting against Microsoft.

And I would point out many more people have gotten rich programming in
non-Microsoft-centric languages, also.

There are a lot more C, C++, Java and even PHP programmers in the world
than there are C# programmers. Maybe the "demand" you see is because no
one programs in it - and only those with the same blind view as you ask
for it. Those of us who have been programming for a long time in
several languages know better.

And for the record - I've been programming for around 40 years now.
I've written code in more languages than you would ever dream -
including C# - and many you've never heard of.

And yes, C# is a great language - for Microsoft bigots and idiots who
don't know any better. Which are you?

--
=============== ===
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attgl obal.net
=============== ===

[Rik]

Re: c-sharp

Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attg lobal.netwrote:

>>php is superior for small web applications,

> ...in your opinion.

And mine and a few hundred others here on this newsgroup. Versus one
opinion to the contrary - yours.

Well, we're quite biased in this group offcourse :P
PHP is quite a lot under fire for being to 'loose'. I can understand that,
it's horribly easy to make something in PHP that only seems to work
correctly but is actually flawed as hell.

--
Rik Wasmus
Posted on Usenet, not any forum you might see this in.
Ask Smart Questions: http://tinyurl.com/anel

[Jerry Stuckle]

Re: c-sharp

Rik wrote:

Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attg lobal.netwrote:

>>>php is superior for small web applications,
>> ...in your opinion.

>And mine and a few hundred others here on this newsgroup. Versus one
>opinion to the contrary - yours.

>
Well, we're quite biased in this group offcourse :P
PHP is quite a lot under fire for being to 'loose'. I can understand
that, it's horribly easy to make something in PHP that only seems to
work correctly but is actually flawed as hell.
>
--Rik Wasmus
Posted on Usenet, not any forum you might see this in.
Ask Smart Questions: http://tinyurl.com/anel

Rik,

The same has been said about C for around 30 years. But that hasn't
stopped a lot of code from being written in it.

Sure it's easy to make mistakes. But I don't think that's a language
problem as much as a programmer problem.

--
=============== ===
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attgl obal.net
=============== ===

[Rik]

Re: c-sharp

Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attg lobal.netwrote:

Rik wrote:

>Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attg lobal.netwrote:

>>>>php is superior for small web applications,
>>> ...in your opinion.
>>And mine and a few hundred others here on this newsgroup. Versus one
>>opinion to the contrary - yours.

> Well, we're quite biased in this group offcourse :P
>PHP is quite a lot under fire for being to 'loose'. I can understand
>that, it's horribly easy to make something in PHP that only seems to
>work correctly but is actually flawed as hell.

The same has been said about C for around 30 years. But that hasn't
stopped a lot of code from being written in it.

Nor should it. I do however think things might have benefited from strict
types. But that's w shole other discussion

Sure it's easy to make mistakes. But I don't think that's a language
problem as much as a programmer problem.

Indeed, bad code can be written in any language.

> --Rik Wasmus

Damn, sig-seperator not working for you? The fix for Thunderbird seems to
be in the nightly build, I trust this will be fixed in an official release
soon :-)

--
Rik Wasmus
Posted on Usenet, not any forum you might see this in.
Ask Smart Questions: http://tinyurl.com/anel

[Rik]

Re: c-sharp

Rik <luiheidsgoeroe @hotmail.comwro te:

w shole

a whole...
Damn this new keyboard.

--
Rik Wasmus
Posted on Usenet, not any forum you might see this in.
Ask Smart Questions: http://tinyurl.com/anel

[Jerry Stuckle]

Re: c-sharp

Rik wrote:

Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attg lobal.netwrote:

>Rik wrote:

>>Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attg lobal.netwrote:
>>>>>php is superior for small web applications,
>>>> ...in your opinion.
>>>And mine and a few hundred others here on this newsgroup. Versus
>>>one opinion to the contrary - yours.
>> Well, we're quite biased in this group offcourse :P
>>PHP is quite a lot under fire for being to 'loose'. I can understand
>>that, it's horribly easy to make something in PHP that only seems to
>>work correctly but is actually flawed as hell.

>The same has been said about C for around 30 years. But that hasn't
>stopped a lot of code from being written in it.

>
Nor should it. I do however think things might have benefited from
strict types. But that's w shole other discussion
>

Agreed - loose typing is both an advantage and a disadvantage. But you
can also overdo strict typing. Pascal comes to mind.

However, in a way I really do wish PHP had "real" data types. As it is,
it's too easy to do thinks like add a string to an integer, as so many
posts in this newsgroup indicate.

>Sure it's easy to make mistakes. But I don't think that's a language
>problem as much as a programmer problem.

>
Indeed, bad code can be written in any language.
>

True. You can write bad code in any language. But some languages make
it very difficult to write good code :-). Fortunately PHP is not among
them.

>> --Rik Wasmus

>
Damn, sig-seperator not working for you? The fix for Thunderbird seems
to be in the nightly build, I trust this will be fixed in an official
release soon :-)
>

Nope - because two hyphens starting a line are not a separator.

The correct sig separator is hyphen-hyphen-space-newline alone on a
single line. That works fine here.

--Rik Wasmus
Posted on Usenet, not any forum you might see this in.
Ask Smart Questions: http://tinyurl.com/anel

--
=============== ===
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attgl obal.net
=============== ===

[Rik]

Re: c-sharp

Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attg lobal.netwrote:

> Damn, sig-seperator not working for you? The fix for Thunderbird seems
>to be in the nightly build, I trust this will be fixed in an official
>release soon :-)
>>

>
Nope - because two hyphens starting a line are not a separator.
>
The correct sig separator is hyphen-hyphen-space-newline alone on a
single line. That works fine here.

It's there, it's just because this combination:
- Quoted Printable
- format=flowed
- delsp=yes

let's Thunderbird (and SeaMonkey) eagerly strip away a space that should
not be stripped. Had a whole discussion about it in
alt.internet.se arch-engines / alt.html (the whole thread is crossposted...) .

MSOE(with Quotefix)/Pan/Opera/Forte Agent/Xnews all don't seem to have
that problem :P
--
Rik Wasmus
Posted on Usenet, not any forum you might see this in.
Ask Smart Questions: http://tinyurl.com/anel

[Jerry Stuckle]

Re: c-sharp

Rik wrote:

Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attg lobal.netwrote:

>> Damn, sig-seperator not working for you? The fix for Thunderbird
>>seems to be in the nightly build, I trust this will be fixed in an
>>official release soon :-)
>>>

>>
>Nope - because two hyphens starting a line are not a separator.
>>
>The correct sig separator is hyphen-hyphen-space-newline alone on a
>single line. That works fine here.

>
It's there, it's just because this combination:
- Quoted Printable
- format=flowed
- delsp=yes
>
let's Thunderbird (and SeaMonkey) eagerly strip away a space that should
not be stripped. Had a whole discussion about it in
alt.internet.se arch-engines / alt.html (the whole thread is crossposted..).
>
MSOE(with Quotefix)/Pan/Opera/Forte Agent/Xnews all don't seem to have
that problem :P

Hmmm, OK, I see what you mean. Maybe delsp is doing what it's supposed
to do?

--
=============== ===
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attgl obal.net
=============== ===

[Rik]

Re: c-sharp

Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attg lobal.netwrote:

Rik wrote:

>Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attg lobal.netwrote:

>>> Damn, sig-seperator not working for you? The fix for Thunderbird
>>>seems to be in the nightly build, I trust this will be fixed in an
>>>official release soon :-)
>>>>
>>>
>>Nope - because two hyphens starting a line are not a separator.
>>>
>>The correct sig separator is hyphen-hyphen-space-newline alone on a
>>single line. That works fine here.

> It's there, it's just because this combination:
>- Quoted Printable
>- format=flowed
>- delsp=yes
> let's Thunderbird (and SeaMonkey) eagerly strip away a space that
>should not be stripped. Had a whole discussion about it in
>alt.internet.s earch-engines / alt.html (the whole thread is
>crossposted..) .
> MSOE(with Quotefix)/Pan/Opera/Forte Agent/Xnews all don't seem to have
>that problem :P

>
Hmmm, OK, I see what you mean. Maybe delsp is doing what it's supposed
to do?

<http://www.rfc-archive.org/getrfc.php?rfc= 3676>
4.3. Usenet Signature Convention

There is a long-standing convention in Usenet news which also
commonly appears in Internet mail of using "-- " as the separator
line between the body and the signature of a message. When
generating a Format=Flowed message containing a Usenet-style
separator before the signature, the separator line is sent as-is.
This is a special case; an (optionally quoted or quoted and stuffed)
line consisting of DASH DASH SP is neither fixed nor flowed.

Generating agents MUST NOT end a paragraph with such a signature
line.

A receiving agent needs to test for a signature line both before the
test for a quoted line (see Section 4.5) and also after logically
counting and deleting quote marks and stuffing (see Section 4.4) from
a quoted line.

Thunderbird fails to test for a signature line however.
--
Rik Wasmus
Posted on Usenet, not any forum you might see this in.
Ask Smart Questions: http://tinyurl.com/anel

[Jerry Stuckle]

Re: c-sharp

Rik wrote:

Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attg lobal.netwrote:
>

>Rik wrote:

>>Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attg lobal.netwrote:
>>>> Damn, sig-seperator not working for you? The fix for Thunderbird
>>>>seems to be in the nightly build, I trust this will be fixed in an
>>>>official release soon :-)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>Nope - because two hyphens starting a line are not a separator.
>>>>
>>>The correct sig separator is hyphen-hyphen-space-newline alone on a
>>>single line. That works fine here.
>> It's there, it's just because this combination:
>>- Quoted Printable
>>- format=flowed
>>- delsp=yes
>> let's Thunderbird (and SeaMonkey) eagerly strip away a space that
>>should not be stripped. Had a whole discussion about it in
>>alt.internet. search-engines / alt.html (the whole thread is
>>crossposted.. ).
>> MSOE(with Quotefix)/Pan/Opera/Forte Agent/Xnews all don't seem to
>>have that problem :P

>>
>Hmmm, OK, I see what you mean. Maybe delsp is doing what it's
>supposed to do?

>
<http://www.rfc-archive.org/getrfc.php?rfc= 3676>
4.3. Usenet Signature Convention
>
There is a long-standing convention in Usenet news which also
commonly appears in Internet mail of using "-- " as the separator
line between the body and the signature of a message. When
generating a Format=Flowed message containing a Usenet-style
separator before the signature, the separator line is sent as-is.
This is a special case; an (optionally quoted or quoted and stuffed)
line consisting of DASH DASH SP is neither fixed nor flowed.
>
Generating agents MUST NOT end a paragraph with such a signature
line.
>
A receiving agent needs to test for a signature line both before the
test for a quoted line (see Section 4.5) and also after logically
counting and deleting quote marks and stuffing (see Section 4.4) from
a quoted line.
>
Thunderbird fails to test for a signature line however.
--Rik Wasmus
Posted on Usenet, not any forum you might see this in.
Ask Smart Questions: http://tinyurl.com/anel

Sorry, I wasn't clear. I wasn't saying Thunderbird wasn't wrong. Just
that they misinterpreted the spec. Or, more likely, just didn't think
about the sigs problem.

--
=============== ===
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attgl obal.net
=============== ===

[Rik]

Re: c-sharp

Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attg lobal.netwrote:

Sorry, I wasn't clear. I wasn't saying Thunderbird wasn't wrong. Just
that they misinterpreted the spec. Or, more likely, just didn't think
about the sigs problem.

I have been an Opera fan for quite some time, sometimes I get a little bit
carried away in some defences :P

--
Rik Wasmus
Posted on Usenet, not any forum you might see this in.
Ask Smart Questions: http://tinyurl.com/anel