U++ forum: Welcome to the forum

Search on this site

Search in forums

Home » Community » Coffee corner » .NET

Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend

.NET [message #5232]

Mon, 11 September 2006 02:06

qwerty
Messages: 130
Registered: May 2006

Experienced Member

just an idea chit chat: what do you think about .NET, (un)managed code, mono project, upp... ?

Report message to a moderator

Re: .NET [message #5238 is a reply to message #5232]

Mon, 11 September 2006 10:05

unodgs
Messages: 1366
Registered: November 2005
Location: Poland

Ultimate Contributor

qwerty wrote on Sun, 10 September 2006 20:06

just an idea chit chat: what do you think about .NET, (un)managed code, mono project, upp... ?

I don't like virtual machines... they run noticeable slower (at least startup time is much longer).
And NET is for one platform only... (I don't know how mono advanced is)
One of main reason java and net became popular was ease of gui programming. With upp coding is even easier and you can have one exe file with native code and small memory footprint..

Report message to a moderator

Re: .NET [message #5240 is a reply to message #5232]

Mon, 11 September 2006 10:18

mirek
Messages: 13975
Registered: November 2005

Ultimate Member

qwerty wrote on Sun, 10 September 2006 20:06

just an idea chit chat: what do you think about .NET, (un)managed code, mono project, upp... ?

Well, if U++ is to prove something, it is the fact that garbage collection is not necessary for effective coding...

In many aspects, U++ goes against trends. But in the end, you get very fast application with low memory footprint developed as fast or faster in U++ than in .NET managed code...

Mirek

Report message to a moderator

Re: .NET [message #5243 is a reply to message #5240]

Mon, 11 September 2006 10:42

qwerty
Messages: 130
Registered: May 2006

Experienced Member

one thing bothers me.... there is need for programming model with effect like COM/COM+ (not the coding! - its terrible). has upp any solution for this?

just need to write own components without interferying code of the others... but dont like COM (.NET assemblies resolve that, but it is .NET Smile

)

Report message to a moderator

Re: .NET [message #5244 is a reply to message #5243]

Mon, 11 September 2006 10:51

mirek
Messages: 13975
Registered: November 2005

Ultimate Member

qwerty wrote on Mon, 11 September 2006 04:42

)

Now I am not quite sure what you address... U++ has COM/OLE/OCI support for GUI components - you can relatively easily convert U++ widgets to work as OCI.

Mirek

Report message to a moderator

Re: .NET [message #5248 is a reply to message #5244]

Mon, 11 September 2006 11:41

qwerty
Messages: 130
Registered: May 2006

Experienced Member

don't mean any visual control, just some custom data access but it doesnt matter, i guess...

I've been just thinking of such a crossplatform implementation, but I think, the only solution is CORBA Smile

[Updated on: Mon, 11 September 2006 11:42]

Report message to a moderator

Previous Topic:	Examples for newby: dynamic widget and ownership
Next Topic:	The SDL Example in Win32

Goto Forum:

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

]

Current Time: Tue Apr 16 22:07:07 CEST 2024

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01739 seconds