VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

Thomas Scheidegger — Wed, 15 Jun 2005 01:02:10 GMT

The whole 'My' concept is nonsense, IMHO. People should better learn the REAL framework namespaces & classes.

re: VB's My for C# Developers

James Foster — Wed, 15 Jun 2005 01:49:42 GMT

How about using the keyword "Our", to show that C# isn't as possessive as VB.NET is? Every married person knows that Our.Computer is better than saying My.Computer.

re: VB's My for C# Developers

Senior Software Engineer — Wed, 15 Jun 2005 02:07:19 GMT

That's ridiculous. C# should support 'My', in exactly the same way as VB.

It's these gratuitous incompatabilities that give us uncertainty about Microsoft's commitment to VB.

re: VB's My for C# Developers

Ed Kaim — Wed, 15 Jun 2005 02:28:21 GMT

Someone's been going through Brian's trash :-)

http://blogs.msdn.com/briankel/archive/2004/09/23/233212.aspx

re: VB's My for C# Developers

Ricky Dhatt — Wed, 15 Jun 2005 02:36:07 GMT

Sorry OT: I just realized, won't "My" keyword be odd in Longhorn, where it has been reported that the "My" prefix has been eliminated?

re: VB's My for C# Developers

Tom — Wed, 15 Jun 2005 02:56:14 GMT

We programmers are not idiots (most of the time, anyway). Therefore, we don't need features that dumb down the programming environment.

As was already pointed out, take some time to learn the library. Programming is not a 5-minute endeavor. It is an art and a science, and takes time to learn and get good at.

VB's My for C# Developers

Merill Fernando's Web Log — Wed, 15 Jun 2005 04:50:17 GMT

If VB has Me and My, then C# should have this and That

Jan Schreuder on .Net — Wed, 15 Jun 2005 08:06:42 GMT

If VB has Me and My, then C# should have this and That

Jan Schreuder on .Net — Wed, 15 Jun 2005 08:09:19 GMT

re: VB's My for C# Developers

Chris Nahr — Wed, 15 Jun 2005 08:41:40 GMT

Ugh. Are you deliberately trying to drive programmers towards C++/CLI? :-(

About the only good reason I can think of to adopt this VB hellspawn is a future redesign of the .NET Framework that puts My/That/Our classes in other namespaces. But of course it would be better to avoid such a redesign in the first place.

Programmers should learn their craft, and being able to search a standard library (especially given the comfortable MSDN Library software) is a very basic part of that craft. Kiddie wheels like "My" are exactly what gave VB its "for dummies" image. Keep "that" away from our beautiful curly-braced C#!

Rudolf Henning says... — Wed, 15 Jun 2005 13:04:33 GMT

re: VB's My for C# Developers

KevinT — Wed, 15 Jun 2005 13:25:05 GMT

I know the popular route is to take a swip at VB developers, but personally, I don't have a problem with My/That, in fact I think it is a good thing. It is far closer to proper OO than using the normal namespace. Ie, the sample you give:

My.Computer.FileSystem.ReadAllText("c:\mytextfile.txt")

vs

IO.File.ReadAllText("c:\mytextfile.txt")

In the first example you are thinking in the problem space, in the second you are thinking in the machine space. OO is better served in the former...

C#ではThat(VB新機能のMy に対するwrapper)

米田 Blog ( SQL Server MEMO ) — Wed, 15 Jun 2005 14:46:59 GMT

C#ではThat(VB新機能のMy に対するwrapper)

re: VB's My for C# Developers

Ryan Heath — Wed, 15 Jun 2005 16:26:11 GMT

Hmm,

wouldnt a (more-or-less)

using That = MS.VB.My;

be sufficient? ;)

// Ryan

re: VB's My for C# Developers

zzz — Wed, 15 Jun 2005 18:12:32 GMT

I'll just quote the comments I agree with..

> The whole 'My' concept is nonsense, IMHO. People should better learn the REAL framework namespaces & classes.

True..

> It's these gratuitous incompatabilities that give us uncertainty about Microsoft's commitment to VB.

Doesn't importing the VB assembly solve this..

>wouldnt a (more-or-less) using That = MS.VB.My; be sufficient? ;)

If not, I'd like to hear why.. What I am missing here?

> I don't have a problem with My/That, in fact I think it is a good thing. It is far closer to proper OO than using the normal namespace

Well I guess then you'd kind of expect that the Computer can be any computer you've authorized with also.. Over network? And perform all kinds of remote operations through that instance? Dunno.

> Kiddie wheels like "My" are exactly what gave VB its "for dummies" image. Keep "that" away from our beautiful curly-braced C#!

However if this was something more thorough and integrate with stuff like WinFS and so on then it might be more interesting..

re: VB's My for C# Developers

Sergio Pereira — Wed, 15 Jun 2005 18:44:49 GMT

I see some comments of people thinking that adding shortcuts to the language is dumbing down itself or calling the programmers idiots. I have to disagree with that. We have to realize that the people that use the language (and VB in special, given its history) are not always professional programmers.
The more the language avoids making itself accessible, the less likely it will be chosen for the quick tasks, which are a hallmark of VB development (or have been).

re: VB's My for C# Developers

kbiel — Wed, 15 Jun 2005 19:13:24 GMT

Here's the problem with little helpers like this:

1) You are now required to have yet another assembly referenced for this to work and it does not add to the program from the user prospective. Adding code that bloats the program and slows the process only to benefit the programmer's laziness is huge no-no in my book.

2) It insulates novice programmers from learning the API.

3) Some day they will learn the API as they progress on to writing more complicated programs, but now that they know how to use the System.IO namespace (and others), they are stuck with lines upon lines of legacy code that has the helper in it.

4) What happens tomorrow when MS adds another namespace under IO for the new WinFS (or some other similar scenario)? Do you keep expanding your little helper object? How big will you allow it to get? At what point is it just a renaming and reorganizing of MS's entire System namespace?

It would be different if it provided functionality for common tasks that surround a given namespace. For example, if you provided a function that automated the chain of stream resources that usually need to be created when attempting to encrypt a string so that now the developer only needs to call "string EncryptString(string rawString)". But just renaming the given namespace just for the sake of convenience, well, that is what the "using" keyword is for.

re: VB's My for C# Developers

Shital Shah — Wed, 15 Jun 2005 20:40:29 GMT

This is sure funny. I guess VB implementation of My is pure mess. Look at all the modules and classes it generates. I would be reluctant to use it even in VB. I strongly believe designers at MS should have tried to come up with normal .Net library which can provides such shortcuts and be usable across languages. It would be then less fency but would have been usable to many more devs out there. Plus time that was burned in doing this fency thing that hardly anyone would care to use could have been better used by VB team to do refactoring functionality. But I'm sure you guys have your reasons...

re: VB's My for C# Developers

Leif Ashley — Wed, 15 Jun 2005 21:45:00 GMT

I think this implementation of "that" is a good idea. :)

While I usually don't like 2 paths to get a job done, and learning the framework is a good idea as well, the MSDN documentation is horrible. Anything that points me in the right direction is a bonus I say.

The beauty of this is that I can just start typing, and somewhat track down what I'm looking for, such as Ping and Log.

re: VB's My for C# Developers

Andrew Hallock — Wed, 15 Jun 2005 22:27:31 GMT

kbiel said:
Some day they will learn the API as they progress on to writing more complicated programs, but now that they know how to use the System.IO namespace (and others), they are stuck with lines upon lines of legacy code that has the helper in it.

Yes, exactly! I've used the pre-generated Page_Load method in aspx code behinds for months, until I realized, what's wrong with overriding OnLoad and calling the base OnLoad? Automation is definitely one good part of writing software, but not when it adds bloat.

re: VB's My for C# Developers

J. Daniel Smith — Wed, 15 Jun 2005 23:04:17 GMT

>wouldnt a (more-or-less)
>
>using That = MS.VB.My;
>
>be sufficient? ;)

That's what I was wondering...why the need for a wrapper? Can't you just us the VB "My" assembly directly? It may not be quite as nice, but it's gotta beat having a separate wrapper.

re: Programmeringssprogreligion

t4rzsan's blog — Wed, 15 Jun 2005 23:19:37 GMT

C# Version of &amp;quot;My&amp;quot; Functionality Available???

Ryan Rinaldi's Blog — Thu, 16 Jun 2005 03:42:33 GMT

What the?
No.
No no no no no!
Why?
I mean, honestly, why?&nbsp; The &ldquo;My&rdquo; namespace is...

VB's

.Net Adventures — Thu, 16 Jun 2005 13:08:22 GMT

Blog de William Chiquito — Thu, 16 Jun 2005 15:37:38 GMT

Superiority Complex

Yann Schwartz — Thu, 16 Jun 2005 16:19:25 GMT

Oh my Dog, something useful will taint our beautiful, manly, curly-braced language. "My" is violating our revered OO paradigm, but having one thousand catch-all static functions (oops - methods) on the poor System.IO.File class is pure OO bliss. Yeah, right.

I, for one, would have liked some VB features creeping in C#, like its elegant way of dealing with late binding. But I forgot, this is pure evil too (but the OO zealots have recently discovered dynamically typed languages, all hope is not lost).

"My" is one of the most elegant features of VB .Net 2.0

"That" is "My" for C#

Sergey Zhikharev — Thu, 16 Jun 2005 17:10:57 GMT

Good job!

re: VB's My for C# Developers

Chris — Fri, 17 Jun 2005 14:31:12 GMT

This is just a new namespace for WinFX concept and some link to existing classes. This article is an introduction to something new for me.
I think the namespace's name is badly choosen, but it's my point of view. I would rather call it "System.Windows.WinFX".
I simply hope "my" is not introducing something like variant to "simplify" coding... I gotta try it with my brand new Beta2 DVD.

Considering the difference between C# and VB, I can not understand why there is so much differences, this just pre-MSIL!

re: VB's My for C# Developers

krhorrocks — Fri, 17 Jun 2005 19:41:15 GMT

bloat

I'm not alone. &amp;quot;My&amp;quot; &amp;quot;That&amp;quot; is really silly

Mike's Dump — Sat, 18 Jun 2005 03:20:58 GMT

I was blogging the other day (Microsoft takes the ‘my’ out of computing)&nbsp;that I thought the whole...

re: VB's My for C# Developers

Gonzo — Sat, 18 Jun 2005 13:53:49 GMT

this isn't somehting new
other people have either done this or at least started; see this guys stuff http://www.brokenkeyboards.com/brokenkeyboards/blogs.aspx?blogid=112

don't agree with all he says though

re: VB's My for C# Developers

Michael Chroman — Mon, 20 Jun 2005 19:45:40 GMT

A software engineer will learn the language/s he/she chooses to work with. He will learn as much as he can about the language. He will use the language properly. He will NOT resort to some foolish shortcuts(ME, OH MY, etc..) just to appease the gods of another language. IF vb wants that, cool, Let vb have that. This is c# and should not be tainted with vb. I like to use the Me and My when I am programming in vb but when using c#, I like the language just like it is.

Leave it alone.

re: VB's My for C# Developers

Stephen — Tue, 21 Jun 2005 06:16:18 GMT

I don't have any problem with developers encapsulating functionality in a way that makes sense to them. If I had to call directly into the windows API every time I wanted to create a button I would start to become very grumpy.

When teaching programming we used to "scaffold" students like this, giving them nice classes which simplified the interfaces to common tasks and gave them a bit of a leg up, so to speak.

However, we were always careful to bring them back down to earth later on. There is nothing more disheartening than to have a past student send you an email like:

Hi, I have just started my new job but they don't have the ::insert name of convenient scaffolding library here::. What do I do?

re: VB's My for C# Developers

Mike — Tue, 21 Jun 2005 15:33:58 GMT

Awhile back, I posted to a discussion board (probably the one on asp.net) asking if you can use the "My" feature in C#. I think I was told by someone that you could just import the namespace, and use it just as you would from VB...but apparently that is not the case. This is unfortunate. I think it's an excellent idea to be able to reach different resources on a computer in a more abstract and easy way. I have not had the need to access a collection of printers yet, but I don't know how to do it off the top of my head. I'd probably have to start with looking into how to retrieve it using WMI (not exactly fun). In my opinion, this "My" concept should be a native feature of the .net API for all languages to use.

re: VB's My for C# Developers

Sergey Osypchuk — Tue, 21 Jun 2005 23:00:52 GMT

I could see a lot of efforts in .NET 2.0 to "simplify" life for starter programmers. It just helps to build simple applications but not complex system. It make more complex to support code reuse. Could developer in any way customize how file is opened when using 'My'?

And what is worse, all such simple thing becomes industrial standards. [I think that worse example is Windows.Forms editor. Have you ever tried to change type of buttons in form?]

And when you start to build complex system first thing you faced that you should prove to team members that practices which are called new could not be used because it not compatible with lot concepts of code reuse.

Sometimes seems that Microsoft wants to make users from most of programmers and I do not like this.

Regarding 'My', 'That' - I think it may be interesting for some of customers (hard to write about them 'developers') but I would like not to see such feature in Framework.

http://dotnet.osypchuk.com
Personal dotNet Experience blog

re: VB's My for C# Developers

Ninputer — Mon, 27 Jun 2005 11:24:18 GMT

C# do have some VB's My feature. Every project have a 'Properties' namespace and contain the things much like VB's My.Settings and My.Resources.

C# Version of &quot;My&quot; Functionality Available???

Ryan Rinaldi's Blog — Fri, 01 Jul 2005 17:38:02 GMT

What the?
No.
No no no no no!
Why?
I mean, honestly, why?&nbsp; The “My” namespace is silly enough,...

re: VB's My for C# Developers

Jan! — Wed, 06 Jul 2005 11:52:39 GMT

Wouldn't it have been more logical to use "This" and "Its", like "Me" and "My"? "That" is not possessive.

re: VB's My for C# Developers

Enrique — Tue, 12 Jul 2005 22:57:09 GMT

I think "that" is confusing Microsoft must preserve the semantic My.

re: VB's My for C# Developers

steve potter — Tue, 16 Aug 2005 18:48:14 GMT

All of you purists that have belittled the "my" feature are missing the point. The motivation for it is to make the job easier for a novice who doesn't have the time or patience to understand and learn the framework. If you think it's stupid then it's not for you. Plus if you are such a purist you probably won't even be programming in VB.NET, which is why they left it out of C#.

It's like the "auto-shift" feature on some cars. To me it's a silly idea...either use a stick or enjoy the convenience of an automatic. But certain people like it.

Point is, .NET wasn't just created for you

re: VB's My for C# Developers

Shine — Sat, 01 Oct 2005 12:47:17 GMT

Someone's been going through Brian's trash

viewing

viewing — Sat, 15 Oct 2005 10:49:32 GMT

viewing

viewing — Sat, 15 Oct 2005 10:49:32 GMT

viewing

re: VB's My for C# Developers

js@mailinator.com — Wed, 16 Nov 2005 22:01:23 GMT

The amazing thing is this. If developers don't like it don't use it. Also if we are to "the REAL framework namespaces & classes" then we should get away from .Net and go back to assembly or even better machine language. What a novel concept. Let’s all be REAL programmers and program in machine language.

Some people are under great time constraints and have to get things done under budget with a limited budget. But I guess there are many companies out there with tons of resources and money to throw at projects with no time constrains what so ever.

Again let's all go back to machine language. After all we don't want to make thing any easier.

re: VB's My for C# Developers

Big Daddy — Fri, 24 Feb 2006 17:14:37 GMT

THIS IS STUPID!! IF all of the software engineers that develop in c#, c++, etc, need this "My" crap, go for it. I believe a true engineer knows his craft. Who the heck needs a dumbed down language? VB is good for non engineers which is why it was designed. However, to most of that don't care about vb, this is just another way the vb people are trying to shove this crap down our throat. If vb died tomorrow, I would not be sad!!! I myself am tired of dealing with the vb vs c,c++,c#, java arguement.

bohulu » links for 2006-09-05

bohulu » links for 2006-09-05 — Tue, 05 Sep 2006 18:21:16 GMT

PingBack from http://my.donews.com/bohulu/2006/09/05/DuqaBKtMqevdoXEjSEfCuQJOTtxACrSzQaaG/

Me and You In User Interfaces

David Walend's Blog — Sun, 31 Dec 2006 22:24:41 GMT

The pronouns we use when we address computers and imagine them addressing us hides some profound insight. I haven't pinned down exactly what.

re: VB's My for C# Developers

MikeJ — Sat, 13 Jan 2007 21:07:01 GMT

Anything that makes a developer's life more productive and the code more readable is to be encouraged.

VB.NET has an advantage over C# here particularly for those new to the .net framework. Anyway you can always not use the My or That namespace, thats your choice.

But it has to be implemented in all .net languages otherwise you may have portability problems. Its a good high-level abstraction in OO terms.

So please implement it in future releases/updates to C#

re: VB's My for C# Developers

Chui — Tue, 06 Feb 2007 15:32:49 GMT

I think it was Steve McConnell who noted that blacksmiths don't store their tools away organised by the type of tools, but by the job. I.e. hammers and tongs might be stored together since they work hand-in-hand.

Similarly, the justification behind the My namespace is commonly used functions and tools should be in an easily accessible namespace. Witness the power of Python scripts, where functions like open(), print() are in the default namespace.

re: VB's My for C# Developers

George — Mon, 09 Apr 2007 17:17:39 GMT

If the "My" namespace is "dumbing" down the programming environment, then what is intellisense doing? By that horrific logic, we shouldn't even have intellisense.

The My namespace saves time, keeps you from adding an outrageous number of using statements and keeps you from having absurdly long calls to properties (if you don't add using statements left and right).

I use C# exclusively, but you VB "haters" need to get over yourselves and stop being blinded by your baseless hatred of vb.net. Its all the same framework ppl...sorry VB.net has a nice way of accessing otherwise buried information.

re: VB's My for C# Developers

Nchantim — Wed, 16 May 2007 16:43:47 GMT

But "My" actually exposes things that are different or otherwise not directly accessible through the framework (at least that I've found). Send a file to the recycle bin using IO namespace, anyone?

If it's easier to read, that is not "dumbing down", it's actually smarter, because it makes my code more understandable to others on my dev team, and thus we're all more productive.

I’m not alone. ‘My’ ‘That’ is really silly « Mike’s Dump

I’m not alone. ‘My’ ‘That’ is really silly « Mike’s Dump — Sun, 09 Sep 2007 03:04:55 GMT

PingBack from http://mikesdump.wordpress.com/2005/06/17/im-not-alone-my-that-is-really-silly/

re: VB's My for C# Developers

K.Murat Baseren — Sun, 07 Oct 2007 23:02:13 GMT

How Do we Add My class in my c# solution?

re: VB's My for C# Developers

K.Murat Baseren — Sun, 07 Oct 2007 23:20:57 GMT

if you use "My" in C# ...

Add references Microsoft.VisualBasic

And...

C# Code..

Microsoft.VisualBasic.Devices.Computer My =new Microsoft.VisualBasic.Devices.Computer();

private void Form1_Load(object sender, EventArgs e)

{

this.txtServerName.Text =My.Name;

}

re: VB's My for C# Developers

SpeedyDev — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 00:22:37 GMT

I like it. I like a balance between power and rapid development. Save me the trouble. I'd much rather traverse the intellisense than dig through MSDN for a solution.

re: VB's My for C# Developers

itay — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 19:25:54 GMT

Don't you think it is much better just to make a lot of snippet codes, instead of my?

that way the programmer also learn.

re: VB's My for C# Developers

SerCey — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 14:09:58 GMT

Special Thanks for C# on That Using ;)

re: VB's My for C# Developers

Gishu — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 13:51:42 GMT

You're a lifesaver... was just trying to make sense of a Office programming HowTo video that uses VB. I need to use C#.

My o Why?

re: VB's My for C# Developers

BrunoT — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 06:22:46 GMT

In regards to the first comment. How is My any different then jQuery's $() function? Its a quickdial into the most useful functionality. I would love to see this added to C#. I doubt you could get this one by Anders. I hope they do keep out XML literals though.

VB's *My* for C# Developers

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

VB's *My* for C# Developers

If VB has Me and My, then C# should have this and That

If VB has Me and My, then C# should have this and That

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

C#ではThat(VB新機能のMy に対するwrapper)

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

re: Programmeringssprogreligion

C# Version of &amp;amp;quot;My&amp;amp;quot; Functionality Available???

VB's

Superiority Complex

"That" is "My" for C#

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

I'm not alone. &amp;amp;quot;My&amp;amp;quot; &amp;amp;quot;That&amp;amp;quot; is really silly

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

C# Version of &amp;quot;My&amp;quot; Functionality Available???

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

viewing

viewing

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

bohulu » links for 2006-09-05

Me and You In User Interfaces

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

I’m not alone. ‘My’ ‘That’ is really silly « Mike’s Dump

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

re: VB's *My* for C# Developers

VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

C# Version of &quot;My&quot; Functionality Available???

re: VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

I'm not alone. &quot;My&quot; &quot;That&quot; is really silly

re: VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

C# Version of "My" Functionality Available???

re: VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers

re: VB's My for C# Developers