Designing great frameworks training: Designing Inherence hierarchies

re: Designing great frameworks training: Designing Inherence hierarchies

RichB — Mon, 14 Feb 2005 20:58:00 GMT

IGraphics - yes. I needed to export a drawing to PDF and SVG - but GDI+ does not support these types.

re: Designing great frameworks training: Designing Inherence hierarchies

Barry Kelly — Tue, 15 Feb 2005 10:45:00 GMT

I'd love to know if any progress has been made on the front of making these presentations downloadable for offline viewing.

re: Designing great frameworks training: Designing Inherence hierarchies

Sean Chase — Tue, 15 Feb 2005 21:10:00 GMT

It's a breaking change to go from virtual to non-virtual...what are your thoughts as far as access modifiers on fields? I'm assuming the same - start private, promote to protected when needed. Is that a breaking change? Obviously the other way around it is. :-)

Centralized listing of presentations of this format?

Andrew G. J. Fung — Tue, 15 Feb 2005 21:10:00 GMT

Is there a centralized listing of presentations of this sort? Certainly I found all the other ones in this series, but I couldn't find any other presentations that Microsoft does like this. I think presentations like these are an incredible find just to hear people's experiences, opinions, and reasonings.

Barry, there's a tool called mmsclient you can use (linux only) to download these. You look at the source for the page, download the ASF, look in the ASF, and pass in the mms:// URL to mmsclient.

The Designing .NET Class Libraries: Designing Inheritance Hierarchies chat is today! (Wednesday, February 16, 2005 at 1:00 p.m. Pacific Time)

frankred's WebLog — Wed, 16 Feb 2005 22:57:00 GMT

re: Designing great frameworks training: Designing Inherence hierarchies

G. Man — Thu, 17 Feb 2005 03:18:00 GMT

Please tell me that "senior" people did not get slide 8 wrong!! EGADS!! They dont know what "virtual" means?? WTF!!!

re: Designing great frameworks training: Designing Inherence hierarchies

Gordon Jamieson — Thu, 17 Feb 2005 16:07:00 GMT

Why include a "virtual" modifier keyword at all if the implementation of that feature in the language is incomplete. Its clear that a "contract" is needed to keep the developer (who derives) in check.

The contract is meaningless if it exists only in documentation form (ie a txt file or a web page). How about having options within the language specification that enforces a written contract. So when you mark a member as virtual you are able to set some rules within your code that enforce what needs to happen if the developer overrides the member. If the developer overrides the member but does not perform the requirements of the contract, the compiler raises exceptions to that effect.

Also, if this feature was not present in c#, you'd get all the C++ and java big heads slagging it for not having the feature; therefore its not the new "language du jour". But its there and like other languages the implementation seems incomplete.

What do you think about that?

Brad Abrams on Designing Inheritance Hierarchies (Summary)

John Wood's Blog — Sat, 19 Feb 2005 19:20:00 GMT

Brad Abrams on Designing Inheritance Hierarchies (Summary)

Designing .NET Class Libraries: Designing Inheritance Hierarchies

Relax, Sip & Enjoy Dev Blog — Sun, 20 Feb 2005 20:37:00 GMT

Designing Inheritance Hierarchies - Designing Great Frameworks

David Hayden - Sarasota Web Design Development - F — Sun, 20 Feb 2005 20:54:00 GMT

Designing Inheritance Hierarchies - Designing Great Frameworks

David Hayden - Sarasota Web Design Development - F — Sun, 20 Feb 2005 20:54:00 GMT

Brad Abrams Designing great frameworks training Designing Inherence | Paid Surveys

Fri, 29 May 2009 19:22:28 GMT

PingBack from http://paidsurveyshub.info/story.php?title=brad-abrams-designing-great-frameworks-training-designing-inherence

Brad Abrams Designing great frameworks training Designing Inherence | porch swing

Fri, 19 Jun 2009 10:39:31 GMT

PingBack from http://fancyporchswing.info/story.php?id=2970