RE: [Eclipsedotnet-developers] .NET 1.1 vs .NET 2.0 again

[<jpp...@gm...>]

That's a good point. Eclipse.NET really isn't using anything special in =
.NET
2.0 as of yet (except for Generics ).

The reason I recently migrated the platform to 2.0 was because this =
would
have to be done eventually, although I admit that I might have been =
hasty in
this matter. Another reason was the redefinition of the Eclipse.NET GUI =
to
be based on SWF rather than SWT, and SWF 2.0 offers some enhancements =
over
the previous version (from what I've read: new controls, previous =
controls
expose some more properties from the underlying Win32 controls. Also, =
one
very cool feature is LayoutManagers; it appears Microsoft has finally =
come
to its senses and looked at Swing, instead of just looking at Java's =
class
library). But, since this new GUI will take some time to be developed, =
there
is no really good reason for the platform to adopt .NET 2.0 right now.

Putting the platform back to 1.1 should be too difficult. The only thing
from 2.0 I'm using is Generics, and that's nothing a thorough search for
"using System.Collections.Generics;" and some patience can't take care =
of.
However, in defense of 2.0 and from what I've been seeing/reading, using
generic collections is faster (not to mention less error-prone) than =
using
"normal" collections (and, considering the implications of =
boxing/unboxing
when using these "normal" collections, I don't find that hard to =
believe),
although I'm a bit skeptic regarding the values that Microsoft provides =
(2x
faster for collections using reference types, and 3x for value types).

All that said, I am not sure about what position to take regarding this
subject. David and Rui, what are your thoughts on this?


JS


------------------------------------
Jo=E3o Paulo Pedro Mendes de Sousa Saraiva
Estudante
jps...@ne...
jpp...@ho...
jpp...@gm...
Rua Mateus Vicente, 9, 10=B0 Dto
1500-445 Lisboa
tel: 217267899
mobile: 965403291
IM: jpp...@ho...
http://mega.ist.utl.pt/~jmss/
------------------------------------

-----Original Message-----
From: ecl...@li...
[mailto:ecl...@li...] On Behalf =
Of
Kunle Odutola
Sent: s=E1bado, 26 de Novembro de 2005 14:03
To: ecl...@li...
Subject: [Eclipsedotnet-developers] .NET 1.1 vs .NET 2.0 again

Hi,

I think I've had a change of heart on this. I still agree that the
availability of .NET 2.0 and Visual Studio 2005 C# Express, and the fact
that .NET 2.0 and .NET 1.1 can co-exist on a machine is evidence that a =
.NET
2.0-only restriction isn't particularly onerous.

Nevertheless, I'm uneasy because nothing in the platform *needs* .NET =
2.0
features. VS.NET 2005 (including C# Express) is a CPU/RAM/DISK hog. Some
people might prefer the leaner VS.NET 2003 unless the newer version adds
real value. I'm not sure that it does in this case.

Anyways, just my 2=A2...


Kunle



-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log =
files
for problems?  Stop!  Download the new AJAX search engine that makes
searching your log files as easy as surfing the  web.  DOWNLOAD SPLUNK!
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idv37&alloc_id=16865&op=3Dick
_______________________________________________
Eclipsedotnet-developers mailing list
Ecl...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/eclipsedotnet-developers

--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.13.8/183 - Release Date: =
25-11-2005
=20

--=20
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.13.8/183 - Release Date: =
25-11-2005
=20