Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Introducing Bing Code Search for C#

blogs.msdn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 235 posts

Re: Introducing Bing Code Search for C#

#171

Post by ehaughee »

breischl wrote: post #135
alkonaut wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, and VS isn't really "complete" without resharper which is a shame because the full versions of VS are already quite expensive.

I tried out Resharper for the entire evaluation period and then dropped it. There were a few nice things, but nothing that was just leaps and bounds better than built in VS features. But everyone says it's necessary, so I keep wondering if I somehow missed the killer features. What are the features of Resharper that make you say VS isn't complete without it?

In my experience it isn't one, two, or even three killer features. It's the aggregate additional polish and productivity increase gleaned from 10 to 20 minor features that shave fractions of seconds and remove a click or two off of incredibly common actions. And I just use the default settings.

Re: Introducing Bing Code Search for C#

#173

Post by itsboring »

Moto7451 wrote: post #150
michaelmior wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about Mono? I have no idea how practical this is for real code bases, but I've used it successfully on several smaller projects.

I have Mono projects in production. Xamarin Studio is pretty nice these days. I don't have a lot of performance sensitive .Net code so I don't notice any real difference between Microsoft's and Xamarin's implementations. One problem I'm running into at the moment is I'm trying to port a vendor's reference SOAP Service over to Mono/Linux and their provided secret sauce DLL is blowing up when calling their objects' con…

Same here, a number of Mono apps in production, both on mobile and desktop. A lot of my recent work has to do with OpenGL-related stuff running on Linux using Mono/MonoDevelop. I have had neither performance-related issues nor stability issues.

Ironically, we have some large-ish C# code-bases that run on everything but Windows.

Re: Introducing Bing Code Search for C#

#174

Post by codygman »

Tobani wrote: post #158
bottompair wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I want to be able to compile things from the command-line first and use the IDE to edit the code." You want a text editor, not an IDE.

Not true. I want still want the IDE compile, type check, and add type-safe completions (When using statically typed languages). I want the IDE to assist me in writing the code. I want my IDE to launch/attach to processes for debugging. Generally, I want the IDE to produce binaries yes, but mostly for my own consumption. I want to be able to access the compiler external from the IDE so I can automate builds/deployment…

I get compile, type check, and add type-safe completions with emacs writing Haskell through haskell-mode, auto-complete, and flycheck.

Re: Introducing Bing Code Search for C#

#175

Post by tanzam75 »

gabriel wrote: post #103
michaelmior wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about Mono? I have no idea how practical this is for real code bases, but I've used it successfully on several smaller projects.

Mono is quite practical. However, C# is one thing, and the .NET Memory Model is quite another. The memory model is, IMHO, where Microsoft is pushing the limits of the existing C# language.

> The memory model is, IMHO, where Microsoft is pushing the limits of the existing C# language.

What has Microsoft changed in the .NET memory model that makes you think they're pushing the limits?

From what I can tell, the .NET memory model is one of the things that has changed the least. The languages have changed a lot faster than the memory model.

Re: Introducing Bing Code Search for C#

#177

Post by tanzam75 »

plq wrote: post #68
chrislomax wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It pains me if I am honest. Our CMS is built on .NET and it's like an uphill battle selling it as it's on IIS and it's .NET. I have played around with the idea of reworking it into an open source language and open source database but I would miss Visual Studio and the language a lot. I don't get all the hate?

Visual Studio's Python and Ruby plugins seem quite decent and free if you're on VS Pro and up. You don't necessarily need to let VS go if you're to migrate to a language supported on more than one platform.

> Visual Studio's Python and Ruby plugins seem quite decent and free if you're on VS Pro and up.

They're free, period. You don't need Visual Studio Pro -- you just need to install the isolated shell.

Re: Introducing Bing Code Search for C#

#178

Post by tanzam75 »

jmspring wrote: post #9
maresca wrote: post #5

C# and .NET get a bad rap for being created by Microsoft. But one thing that can't be ignored is how polished their development tools are. I absolutely love coding in Visual Studio.

The dev tools are good, though I think some of the documentation on msdn needs a lot of cleanup/improvement. It is not uncommon to get routed to older API versions or different languages. That said, it is getting better over time. This tool definitely helps with C#. One thing I like about Apple developer docs (on developer.apple.com) that MSDN doesn't have (at least didn't last time I looked) is the ability to get a…

> One thing I like about Apple developer docs (on developer.apple.com) that MSDN doesn't have (at least didn't last time I looked) is the ability to get a PDF covering specific topics. These are useful when I would rather have not deal with a browser while developing.

Visual Studio still has an option to install all MSDN content on your hard drive, for offline access. It's the traditional Help Viewer model.

This only covers language and SDK documentation -- not the magazine articles and other random stuff.

Re: Introducing Bing Code Search for C#

#179

Post by MichaelGG »

Locke1689 wrote: post #116
Touche wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But F# is so much better that I can't think of a single reason for choosing C# over it.

I agree that F# is a great language, but there are a couple projects in which I favor C#. One reason to favor C# is that it just has better IDE support, hands down. In addition, if I'm working with C# devs it's just nicer to use something everyone already knows. As far as the language goes, though, perf sensitive stuff often makes more sense for me to do in C#. This is a combination of reasons: 1) I generally have a…

I've found that with F#'s inlining, you can get significantly better code generated. The C# team has seemed hostile to the concept of implementing many compiler optimizations, and the JIT still does a poor job inlining. (And still no SIMD...)

Even in C#, imperative style will be faster. Without better type systems and much better compilers, that won't change (but F# could implement fusion a la Haskell). It may be "essentially the same", code, but with 1/20th the type annotations. It adds up.

I've not found a case where there'd be an excellent C# programmer not capable of using F#. Sure, if it's a little project and it's required that "random" C# programmers be capable of working on the codebase, fine, OK. Otherwise, the benefits of the language outpace the minor learning curve.

Re: Introducing Bing Code Search for C#

#180

Post by cl8ton »

maresca wrote: post #5

C# and .NET get a bad rap for being created by Microsoft. But one thing that can't be ignored is how polished their development tools are. I absolutely love coding in Visual Studio.

Agreed, MS Visual Studio 2013 must have been written by space aliens for their advanced features and openness to third-party platforms and languages.

The one thing that bugs me when these types of threads start is the hatefulness of others to bash MS for trying to make a profit and lock in when everyone else here is trying to earn a profit on their must have technology.

Why single MS out on this? Isn’t this what your trying to do?

Post reply on HN