Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:Step-by-step impressions (assessment) (Score 1) 195

I have finished my analysis of VS 2017 much sooner than expected because of deciding to continue writing the aforementioned code with the 2012 version. Without getting a too bad impression about it, I didn't feel comfortable enough to continue; additionally, I found what IMHO is a serious issue which should be fixed right away.

As already pointed out, the modularity of 2017 is very appealing and allows a very light environment which is certainly quick; as quick as the much older and under-featured 2012. Note that, during the installation, I selected the main C#/VB.NET desktop and web options and some basic Visual C++. For me, just this issue makes this version more appealing than 2015.

In its default configuration, 2017 has much more coding helps (all the bells and whistles automatically appearing when typing or moving the mouse or similar) than 2012 and 2015. This is one of the defining features of VS with respect to other IDEs, but Microsoft might have brought things way too far on this front. Nothing of this seems to affect the VS usability (quick and responsive; additionally, all these functionalities are likely to be easily disabled) and that’s why I cannot say that is completely wrong. Small details helping to improve your coding experience are certainly nice, but including too many details which virtually nobody would ever use (e.g., showing some information when placing the cursor in certain area which can quickly be retrieved in 3 different ways) doesn't seem too logical. All this is even more relevant by bearing in mind the usual evolution of VS releases: first versions full of bugs which usually take over 1 year to be fixed. They have an excellent underlying framework (almost none of the new features since VS 2008 have improved my coding experience in a relevant way), why unnecessarily making it buggy or kind of joker-of-all-trades-master-of-none? I think that Microsoft should eminently focus on delivering reliable and bug-free versions, rather than on continue adding not-too-useful features.

In general terms, I felt quite comfortable working on VS 2017 (at least, before discovering the problem below), but by basically using it as VS 2012. Note that I continued a C# (library + console) project created in VS 2012. Right at the start, I saw a curious error-over-reporting issue: a simple 1 error in 2012 clearly stating the problem (wrong definition of a class) vs. 88 in 2017 (one for the wrongly-defined class and 87 for further references to that class). I saw also other weirdnesses like expanding a tree of sub-folders in the project window which got suddenly closed. But all these things happened just once or twice and I was kind of expecting them, so I didn't really mind any of this (on the other hand, this should be seen by Microsoft as bad news: I do expect random errors and glitches in a first VS version because this has always been the case!).

The real deal breaker was the problems with the debugger: it plainly doesn't work as it should. I tested the created-in-VS-2012-a-bit-complex code, also new-2017-extremely-simple projects and the behaviour was always quite chaotic via ignoring lines for no clear reason. For example, I usually write codes including something like string string1 = "whatever"; string1 = string1;, where the whole purpose of the second line is to hold a break-point (where I will see the string1 properties via the popup window); VS 2017 skips the break-point in this second line! And this skipping-lines behaviour occurs in other situations, what makes the whole debugging process very uncomfortable right away (I have relevant experience in different IDEs and languages, VS and C# among them; I don't need to spend even one minute to try to fully understand the unexpected behaviour of a debugger to know that I don't like it). Hopefully, this is just a buggy behaviour and Microsoft hasn't actually modified the way in which the VS debugger has always worked. Another issue I didn't like too much about debugging was the fact that the break-points have to be placed in the LHS margin, in the farthest side, before the line numbers. Placing a break-point should be an extremely easy process triggered by virtually any action on a more or less wide area. If I click anywhere on the left of the central coding area, VS should assume that I want to set a break-point there; why ignoring all my clicks unless the ones located in the border-left part?

In any case, I have got a reasonably good overall impression about VS 2017 and it is likely to become my next main VS (= after SP1 is released? After 1-2 years? No idea). I assume that Microsoft will fix the problems in the debugger (at least, the line-skipping one) right away. I might even use VS 2017 for the upcoming supporting video about the referred code (it is DateParser, a new part of the multi-part library FlexibleParser. Note that I always record a sound-less video with VS showing the main features of the new part), in case that these problems will be fixed. In any case, I insist in the fact that I don't share (cannot even understand) most of Microsoft's ideas regarding how to continue evolving VS. That is, I will eventually move to VS 2017 only because of being the less-bad-alternative (= better than VS 2015 + including minor improvements with respect to the virtually-obsolete VS 2012).

Comment Re:Why a continent? (Score 1) 89

The list in my previous comment was also meant to somehow support your point: lots of alternatives which almost nobody uses. And what happens with the country second-level domains is even worse (a descriptive but incomplete list). I am currently running some crawling bots to rank domains and have found quite a few problems on this front; in fact, they still cannot understand all the possible scenarios (after having collected over 1M domains).

Comment Re:Step-by-step impressions (intro + downloading) (Score 1) 195

I have worked enough with VS to know that 7 GB isn't much. But I found kind of curious a so big value after having chosen just some basic options. In any case, all what matters is the final performance and, as explained in the second part of my comment, its behaviour on this front seems quite good: starts much quicker than 2015, even quicker than 2012 (notably older, under-featured and lighter).

Comment Re:Step-by-step impressions (intro + downloading) (Score 1) 195

In theory, newer versions should support all what was done with older ones by eventually performing some minor modifications (quick migrations or changing the .NET version associated with the given project). But I guess that it is a matter of personal taste. I prefer to mostly use just one version and, when required, newer ones.

Comment Re:Step-by-step impressions (intro + downloading) (Score 1) 195

Every new .NET/Visual Studio version brings something new which some people might find relevant and others might not. In my case, I use VS mostly for C# & VB.NET and rarely with new .NET features. Over 99% of all the code which I write in VS might be done with VS 2010 (and .NET 3.5). Sometimes, I need newer versions and plainly rely on them. For example, while contributing to the open .NET project (CoreCLR and CoreFX), I had to use VS 2015.

Comment Step-by-step impressions (first use) (Score 1) 195

After testing it for some minutes, I found two interesting issues:
- It loads pretty quickly. Right after restarting my computer, the fastest one is VS 2012, then 2017 and, finally, 2015. But, when executing them for a second time, 2017 becomes even faster than 2012.
- It has some new project types (.NET Core and .NET Standard), which are only present in C# (no more duplication of everything C#-VB.NET?!). And here I found a not so pleasant surprise: after creating a new .NET Standard project and the opening window including (sorry about the crappy indentation, but the editor forced me to use less 'junk' characters):

using System;

namespace ClassLibrary
{
public class Class1
{
}
}

... VS complained about not being able to find the System namespace!! and the class being wrong because of not finding System.Object!! I guess that this has to do with my initial selection of modules (perhaps VB.NET not supporting the new projects is another consequence), but come on!! How can the code generated by default be faulty?! This isn't a bug, this is pure terrorism! LOL.

I usually let new VS or .NET versions to be improved during some time (e.g., various years) before using them, to avoid "peculiarities" like the aforementioned one or simply because of being happy with my current version. But I will do a small exception this time: I have to develop a reasonably big C# code during the next weeks and do feel like trying VS 2017 (by assuming that it can keep up). So, I will write the third and final part of this post in some weeks, after having got a proper feeling about this new version.

Comment Step-by-step impressions (intro + downloading) (Score 2) 195

I use and like VS quite a lot, but am not precisely an early adopter. At the moment, I am mostly using the 2012 version and, eventually (= when forced to do so), the 2015 one. Actually, I am not even sure why I stopped using VS 2010 because it was quite reliable. I have seen some problems with 2012, but have gradually got used to them. I haven't used 2015 much, but don't think that I like it: it consumes too many resources, even for my a-bit-old-but-quite-powerful desktop computer.

I am currently downloading the 2017 Community (clarification which is perhaps still required: fully-functional free version, which has nothing to do with the old VS Express) and everything looks OK so far. The downloading interface seems nicer than the previous ones. Microsoft promised this version to be much more modular and apparently they delivered. I am saying apparently because the options are there, although the size is still quite big anyway (over 7 GB after having chosen the most basic options).

Comment Re:Any happy CDN CloudFlare client around? (Score 1) 87

PS: just in case that it wasn't clear, bear in mind that with "my sites" I meant customsolvers.com (main site) and varocarbas.com (where I store R&D-oriented anything). Their main purpose is to promote and to give some visibility to my work as a programmer (I don't get any direct income from the visitors they get). Also note that I don't manage others' websites (don't even build them).

Slashdot Top Deals

The absence of labels [in ECL] is probably a good thing. -- T. Cheatham

Working...