http://forums.alliedmods.net/showthread.php?t=64767
The source acts like its missing a ton of stuff I can't find like uh TBX and some other things
I don't really know the language, but I have hoping I could get it to compile with delphi 2009/2010.net and then see about porting its IL. (to C# I guess)
The reasoning behind this is because pawnstudio is crash happy but the program (layout, syntax highlighting, the fact that the intellisense (clamsense) works with functions from includes, in the file, etc) is really easy to use.
Can anyone help?
That is a really, really bad idea. Stabilize first, then port (if needed). Porting introduces problems, and it is not nice when you cannot tell if the bug is existing or new.
[edit] I've downloaded the source. It is not what I'd call modern, well-refactored Delphi code. Long functions, no object-orientation visible, all code in the form event handlers.
TBX you can find at Torry
If you are using Delphi 7 you're using the VCL/various components native to delphi.
Those are NOT present in c# (in Delphi 2009/2010 probably yes), so you can't do a naive port, you will need to redo most of the program. (at least the interface part)
TBX is not yet supported but you can look at spTBX
It will not be very easy to port in C#.
If you don't know Delphi, you ought to get someone who does to help out. Delphi's an easier language to work with than most, but like any language it has subtleties, complexities and dark corners. If you try to port it without the necessary domain knowledge, then not only are you reinventing the wheel, you're reinventing it half-blind. Especially if you're not able to compile the original and test it.
What units does it say are missing, BTW?
Related
I know it might not be worth it but just for education purposes I want to know if there is a way to inject your own keywords to .NET languages.
For example I thought it's good to have C++ asm keyword in C#.
Remember I'm not talking about how to implement asm keyword but a general way to add keyword to C#.
My imagined code :
asm{
mov ax,1
add ax,4
}
So is there a way to achieve this ?
The answers which cover implementing keyword{ } suits enough for this question.
This isn't possible at the moment. However, there's a Microsoft project in development called Roslyn that can be summarised as "the compiler as a service." It allows you, amongst other things, to extend or modify the behaviour of the compiler through an API.
When Roslyn becomes available, I believe this should be something that (with caution!) is quite doable.
You can use whatever tools you would like to pre-process your code before sending it to the C# compiler. For example, you might use VS macros to do the pre-processing, mapping a given syntax that you invented into something that does compile into C# code, possibly generating an error if there is a problem. If VS macros aren't powerful enough for you then you can always use your own IDE that does whatever you code it to do to the text before sending it to the compiler.
There is no built in support in the compiler for specifying your own keywords/syntax; you would need to handle it entirely independent of the compiler.
Unfortunately this is not possible. You can't extend or alter the languages in any way.
You could in some obscure way use PostSharp to read and parse strings and transform them to custom code at compile time (a pre processor). But you would not get very happy with that, as it is very error prone and you won't get any kind of intellisense or code completion for your magic strings.
According to MSDN keywords are predefined and cannot be altered. So you can't add any, because you would need to tell the compiler how to handle them. Insofar, no you can't.
I’m trying to make CodeContracts in C# look more like statements so i need a tool that allows me substitute some code before the compiler sees it, if there is no way to do it i guess a Visual Studio plug in would help too.
Trying to fight the syntax of a language like C# is simply a bad idea. The tools you use will fight back with determination.
Just go with the flow and stop trying to swim against the current. You'll soon get used to the syntax and it will make sense to everyone else who works with the code.
You could always channel the code through a C++ preprocessor (like mcpp) before sending the code to the C# compiler. That would give you full power of C++ macros :)
I guess you could use a pre-build task to do that.
I use this approach in one project of mine (though it is not C#, but a quite different language, but I needed the C++ like macros).
What is wrong with the normal codecontracts ?
http://www.cauldwell.net/patrick/blog/CodeContracts.aspx
And
http://weblogs.asp.net/podwysocki/archive/2008/11/08/code-contracts-for-net-4-0-spec-comes-alive.aspx
What about expression trees?
Any suggestions on how I should approach this? Thanks.
Take a look at this VB to C# Comparison chart for some of the syntax and keyword differences.
I have to do this often - and my biggest hang-up is the semi-colon. Never fails that my first few days of writing VB after a longer stint of C# coding, the VB compiler is always barking at me for putting a semi-colon on every line of VB code.
Other than that, it shouldn't be too painful. If you're fluent in C#, moving to VB might be stressful for the first few days, but after that you should be smooth sailing.
Code converter tools come in handy to help you remember/learn/re-learn all of those odd syntax differences that you forget easily. The one I normally turn to first is http://converter.telerik.com/ - and if that won't do the trick, a quick google search for code converters will turn up a handful of other good ones.
Another pain point that I've had in the past too is Snippets. Snippets in C# rock - but in VB rock a bit less. Get to know the differences between those and life will be much easier. (Come on VB team - get that enter key working like the C# snippet team has it...)
A good C# to VB.NET converter will help.
Aside from revulsion and horror I recommend (from experience - ugh) to just start. Build a simple app. The magic is in the experience. It doesn't make sense until you have spent lots of time trying to figure out why something doesn't work.
I went the other way (VB to C#) and found the syntax to be so similar that the transition was painless. I can now pretty much program in either platform – thanks a lot to the IDE intellisense.
Take advantage of the "With" statement! One of my favorite parts of VB.NET.
It's not as difficult as it seems at first. Took me about a month from going strictly C++\C# to VB to get comfortable.
If you are familiar with programing you should just have to learn the syntax...why would anyone want to go from C# to VB? who knows :)
My first question would be 'Why?'. I'd like to think that you can pretty much get the same thing done with either C# or VB.Net. Given that it's managed code, why not just leave them as they are?
Let's just assume you have your reasons :)
1) There are a couple of tools that will do this (see http://www.developerfusion.com/tools/convert/csharp-to-vb/ for a sample).
2) The other option is to manually convert the code, compile, fix errors, and repeat. Painful.
It's a pretty straight-forward thing, actually. VB.Net is a perfectly good (if, imo, verbose) language with most of the expressiveness you've grown accustomed to in C#. Just be aware that certain specific keywords are different and that you've got a different background culture and you'll do fine.
You can also use a tool like CodeRush from DevExpress (no affiliation). The short-cut keys for any operation are the same for both languages and will produce the correct output for the language.
For example: key combo "mv" yields:
In C#
public void MethodName ()
{
}
In VB
Public Sub MethodName()
End Sub
Use XML literals and marvel how resentful fellow C# programmers suddenly are.
There were some useful articles in Visual Studio magazine back in Jan 2008.
What C# developers should know about VB
And for completeness: what VB developers should know about C#
I'm just starting out with C# and to me it seems like Microsoft Called their new system .Net because you have to use the Internet to look everything up to find useful functions and which class they stashed it in.
To me it seems nonsensical to require procedure/functions written and designed to stand alone ( non instantiated static objects) to have their class not also function as their namespace.
That is Why can't I use Write or WriteLine instead of Console.WriteLine ?
Then when I start to get used to the idea that the objects I am using ( like string) know how to perform operations I am used to using external functions to achieve ( like to upper, tolower, substring, etc) they change the rules with numbers, numbers don't know how to convert themselves from one numeric type to another for some reason, instead you have to invoke Convert class static functions to change a double to an int and Math class static functions to achieve rounding and truncating.. which quickly turns your simple( in other languages) statement to a gazillion character line in C#.
It also seems obsessed with strong typing which interferes somewhat with the thought process when I code. I understand that type safety reduces errors , but I think it also increases complexity, sometimes unnecessarily. It would be nice if you could choose context driven types when you wish without the explicit Casting or Converting or ToStringing that seems to be basic necessity in C# to get anything done.
So... Is it even possible to write meaningful code in notepad and use cl with out Internet access? What ref book would you use without recourse to autocomplete and Network access?
Any suggestions on smoothing the process towards grokking this language and using it more naturally?
I think you're suffering a bit from the fact that you've used to working in one way during some years, and now must take time to get yourself comfortable using / developing in a new platform.
I do not agree with you , that MS hasn't been consistent on the fact that a string knows how it should convert itself to another type, and other datatypes (like ints) do not.
This is not true, since strings do not know for themselves how they should be converted to another type as well. (You can use the Convert class to Convert types to other types).
It is however true that every type in .NET has a ToString() method, but, you should not rely on that method to convert whatever you have to a string.
I think you have never worked in an OO language before, and therefore, you're having some difficulties with the paradigm shift.
Think of it this way: it's all about responsabilities and behaviour. A class is (if it is well designed) responsible for doing one thing, and does this one thing good.
There is no excuse to use notepad to code a modern language. SharpDevelop or Visual C# Express provide the functionality to work with C# in a productive way.
And no, due to the complexity, not using the internet as a source of information is also not a good option.
You could buy a book that introduces you to the concepts of the language in a structured way, but to get up-to-date information, the internet is neccessary.
Yes, there are drawbacks in C#, like in any other language. I can only give you the advice to get used to the language. Many of the drawbacks become understandable after that, even if some of them don't become less annoying. I recommend that you ask clear, direct questions with example code if you want to know how some language constructs work or how you can solve specific problems more efficiently. That makes it easier to answer those questions.
For notepad, I have no useful advice, however I would advise you to use one of the free IDE's, Microsofts Express Editions, or Sharp Develop.
The IDE will speed the groking of the language, at which point, you can switch back to notepad.
Reading your post I was thinking that you worked mostly with C or dynamic languages previously. Maybe C# is just a wrong choice for you, there are IronPython, F# and a bunch of other languages that have necessary functionality (like functions outside of classes etc.)
I disagree with you about consistency. In fact there are small inconsistency between some components of .NET, but most part of FW is very consistent and predictable.
Strong typing is a huge factor in low defect count. Dynamic typing plays nice in small/intermediate projects (like scripts, etc). In more or less complex program dynamism can introduce a lot of complexity.
Regarding internet/autocomplete - I can hardly imagine any technology with size of .NET that doesn't require a lot of knowledge sources.
Programming in c# using notepad is like buying a ferrari to drive in dirt roads.
At least use Visual Studio Express Edition. For what you wrote I understand that you come from a non OO background, try to learn the OO concept and try to use it. You will eventually understand most design decisions made for .Net.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-oriented_programming
Oh boy where do i start with you(this will be a long post hahaha), well, lets go little by little:
"Microsoft called their system .NET because you have to use Intenet...", the reason why is called .NET is because the SUITE OF MICROSOFT LANGUAGUES(and now some other ones too like Phyton and Ruby, etc) CAN CALL ANY LIBRARY or DLLs, example you can "NET"(Network OR CALL) a DLL that was built in Visual Basic, F#, C++ from WITHIN C# or from any of those languagues you can also call(or ".NET") C# libraries. OK ONE DOWN!!!
NEXT ONE: "it seems nonsensical to require....to have their class not also function as their namespace", this is because a Namespace can have AS MANY CLASSES AS YOU WISH, and your question:
"That is Why can't I use Write or WriteLine instead of Console.WriteLine ?".
The reason is because: "Console"(System.Console hense the "Using" statement at the beginning of your program) Namespace is where "Write" and "WriteLine" LIVES!!(you can also FULLY qualify it (or "call It"). (all this seems to me that you need to study C# Syntax), ok NEXT:
"when I start to get used to the idea that the objects...", ok in simple words:
C# is a "Strongly Type-Safe language" so that SHOULD-MUST tell you what "you are getting in to" otherwise STAY WITH "WEAK or NO TYPE SAFE LANGUAGES" LIKE PHP or C , etc. this does NOT means is bad it just MEANS IS YOUR JOB TO MAKE SURE, as i tell my students: "IF YOU NEED AN INT THEN DEFINE AN INT INSTEAD LETTING THE COMPILER DO IT FOR YOU OTHERWISE YOU WILL HAVE A LOT OF BAD BUGS", or in other words do YOUR homework BEFORE DESIGNING A PIECE OF SOFTWARE.
Note: C# is IMPLICITY TYPE SAFE language SO IF YOU WANT YOU CAN RUN IT AS UNSAFE so from then it wiLL be your job to make sure, so dont complain later(for being lazy) when bugs arrive AT RUNTIME(and a lot of times when the customer is already using your crappy software).
...and last but not least : Whey do you wan to shoot yourself by using notepad? Studio Express is FREE, even the database SQL SERVER is FREE TOO!!, unless you work for a company I WILL ASK FOR PRO, ETC. all the "extra" stuff is for large companies, teams, etc, YOU CAN DO 99% OF THE STUFF WITH THE FREE VERSIONS(and you can still buy-update to full version once you want to scalate to Distributed Software or a Large Project, or if your software becomes a big hit, Example: if you need millions of queryes or hits PER SECOND from your database or 100 people are working on same project(code) but for the majority of times for 2 or 3 "normal" developers working at home or small office the FREE ONES ARE ENOuGH!!)
cherrsss!!! (PS: Software Developer since the 80's)
Certainly there's the difference in general syntax, but what other critical distinctions exist? There are some differences, right?
The linked comparisons are very thorough, but as far as the main differences I would note the following:
C# has anonymous methodsVB has these now, too
C# has the yield keyword (iterator blocks)VB11 added this
VB supports implicit late binding (C# has explicit late binding now via the dynamic keyword)
VB supports XML literals
VB is case insensitive
More out-of-the-box code snippets for VB
More out-of-the-box refactoring tools for C#Visual Studio 2015 now provides the same refactoring tools for both VB and C#.
In general the things MS focuses on for each vary, because the two languages are targeted at very different audiences. This blog post has a good summary of the target audiences. It is probably a good idea to determine which audience you are in, because it will determine what kind of tools you'll get from Microsoft.
This topic has had a lot of face time since .Net 2.0 was released. See this Wikipedia article for a readable summary.
This may be considered syntax, but VB.NET is case insensitive while C# is case sensitive.
This is a very comprehensive reference.
Since I assume you can google, I don't think a link to more sites is what you are looking for.
My answer: Choose base on the history of your developers. C# is more JAVA like, and probably C++ like.
VB.NET was easier for VB programmers, but I guess that is no really an issue anymore sine there are no new .NET programmers coming from old VB.
My opinion is that VB is more productive then C#, it seems it is always ahead in terms of productivity tools (such as intelisense), and I would recommend vb over c# to someone that asks. Of course, someone that knows he prefers c# won't ask, and c# is probably the right choice for him.
Although the syntax sugar on C#3 has really pushed the bar forward, I must say some of the Linq to XML stuff in VB.Net seems quite nice and makes handling complex, deeply nested XML a little bit more tolerable. Just a little bit.
One glaring difference is in how they handle extension methods (Vb.Net actually allows something that C# doesn't - passing the type on which the extension method is being defined as ref): http://blog.gadodia.net/extension-methods-in-vbnet-and-c/
Apart from syntax not that much any more. They both compile to exactly the same IL, so you can compile something as VB and reflect it into C#.
Most of the apparent differences are syntactic sugar. For instance VB appears to support dynamic types, but really they're just as static as C#'s - the VB compiler figures them out.
Visual Studio behaves differently with VB than with C# - it hides lots of functionality but adds background compiling (great for small projects, resource hogging for large ones) and better snippet support.
With more and more compiler 'magic' in C#3 VB.Net has really fallen behind. The only thing VB now has that C# doesn't is the handles keyword - and that's of debatable benefit.
#Tom - that really useful, but a little out of date - VB.Net now supports XML docs too with '''
#Luke - VB.Net still doesn't have anon-methods, but does now support lambdas.
The biggest difference in my opinion is the ability to write unsafe code in C#.
Although VB.NET supports try...catch type exception handling, it still has something similar to VB6's ON ERROR. ON ERROR can be seriously abused, and in the vast majority of cases, try...catch is far better; but ON ERROR can be useful when handling COM time-out operations where the error can be trapped, decoded, and the final "try again" is a simple one line.
You can do the same with try...catch but the code is a lot messier.
This topic is briefly described at wikipedia and harding.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_C_Sharp_and_Visual_Basic_.NET
http://www.harding.edu/fmccown/vbnet_csharp_comparison.html
Just go through and make your notes on that.
When it gets to IL its all just bits. That case insensitivity is just a precompiler pass.
But the general consensus is, vb is more verbose.
If you can write c# why not save your eyes and hands and write the smaller amount of code to do the same thing.
One glaring difference is in how they handle extension methods (Vb.Net actually allows something that C# doesn't - passing the type on which the extension method is being defined as ref): http://blog.gadodia.net/extension-methods-in-vbnet-and-c/
Yes VB.NET fixed most of the VB6 problems and made it a proper OOP language - ie. Similar in abilities to C#. AlthougnI tend to prefer C#, I do find the old VB ON ERROR construct useful for handling COM interop timeouts. Something to use wisely though - ON ERROR is easily abused!!