A bit of fun for programmers

[doodab]

Fool. the last time I needed to do something like that I loaded it as J# and delivered it 3 hours later.

I bet you billed considerably less for those 3 hours than I did during the 3 months I spent learning C#.

Fool, was it?

[dang65]

I think it comes from people who started out with ASP before .Net and now say .Net to mean ASP.NET usually with VB and very little else. This usage seems to have infected a lot of managers and agents, hence it's possible to find adverts for ".Net developers" that don't mention the language that will be used at all:

.Net Developer - London - £300/day City, London Contract IT Job

Java and C# programmers of my acquaintance seem to understand the subtleties rather better because they tend to be more technically minded, but then that could be because tend to avoid befriending the obviously stupid.

I still don't understand what the big fuss is about here. To go back to my previous television analogy, you can say you work in television if you are a television cameraman. The platform is television. You are a cameraman and probably use a specific model of camera, but you work in television. A sound recordist works in television as well. You both work in television.

Where is the confusion in someone "saying .Net to mean ASP.NET usually with VB and very little else"? He is still a .NET developer, just as much as someone using C# and WinForms to develop a desktop application.

Admittedly, the job you linked to says ".NET Developer" and then goes on to describe a web developer role ("The right applicant will be Front End focused with expertise and experience using JavaScript and CSS"), but that's for the applicant to filter out just as they would filter out an unsuitable location or rate. I don't think anyone would throw their toys out of the pram just because ".NET Developer" turned out to mean something other than financial desktop application developer, or whatever.

God, I'm glad I opted not to bother with .NET, in any form.

[2BIT]

God, I'm glad I opted not to bother with .NET, in any form.

I think if i was to go with .net or java it would be .net - no reason except that don't really dig java

[doodab]

I still don't understand what the big fuss is about here. To go back to my previous television analogy, you can say you work in television if you are a television cameraman. The platform is television. You are a cameraman and probably use a specific model of camera, but you work in television. A sound recordist works in television as well. You both work in television.

Where is the confusion in someone "saying .Net to mean ASP.NET usually with VB and very little else"? He is still a .NET developer, just as much as someone using C# and WinForms to develop a desktop application.

Admittedly, the job you linked to says ".NET Developer" and then goes on to describe a web developer role ("The right applicant will be Front End focused with expertise and experience using JavaScript and CSS"), but that's for the applicant to filter out just as they would filter out an unsuitable location or rate. I don't think anyone would throw their toys out of the pram just because ".NET Developer" turned out to mean something other than financial desktop application developer, or whatever.

God, I'm glad I opted not to bother with .NET, in any form.

There is no fuss. I am not confused. I am simply observing that there seem to be two schools of thought as to the meaning of the term .Net, and proposing a mechanism by which I think that came to pass.

Step 1 - Some people who work with ASP.Net and VB describe themselves as .Net developers
Step 2 - Some Managers and agents refer to ASP.Net development using VB as .Net development
Step 3 - Some people in the wider population use the term .Net to mean ASP.Net with VB development
Step 4 - Someone comes along and tells the people in step 2 and 3 that they are "wrong" to call people ".Net developers" because .Net isn't a language

I personally don't give a tulip about any of this BTW, I just thought it was ironic that it's largely because of the #1s that the #2s and #3s exist to annoy the more pedantic #4s.

The job advert was simply to illustrate that #2s exist in the real world.

[OwlHoot]

I bet you billed considerably less for those 3 hours than I did during the 3 months I spent learning C#.

Fool, was it?

Hehe

Anyway, can't one simply convert at will between those .net languages? They all use almost identical features of the CLI

(I think there are minor limitations with VB; but a translation tool could probably work round even those with system calls or obscure pragmas.)

[amcdonald]

I didn't say it was wrong. I said it was confusing. I was simply pointing out that the reason that people who are unfamiliar with the details of the technology often use the term .Net as if it referred to a programming language is because of the people who use ASP.NET and refer to themselves as ".Net programmers".

I myself had one contract where I was asked by the client to port some of my code from Java to ".Net". They were a bit confused when I gave them a load of C# code, because what they actually meant was VB, it hadn't occurred to them that someone outside of their circle might construe .Net to mean C#.

Weird as most people code in C# for .Net, you'd think the assumption would be the reverse

[doodab]

Weird as most people code in C# for .Net, you'd think the assumption would be the reverse

That's exactly why I assumed they meant C#. It does seem to be the dominant language for that platform. Everyone loves a curly bracket.

[Durbs]

hence it's possible to find adverts for ".Net developers" that don't mention the language that will be used at all

Theres no problem with that - language doesn't matter, they have an end product in mind and know its going to be MS based. Whether the developer sits down on day one and starts it in VB, J#, F# or C# - doesn't matter one jot, the end product is exactly the same.

Its more important to get the right candidate, if they can get the right VB dude, it'll be VB, if the right guy turns out to be C#, it'll be C#. Both these languages are well supported and they wont have any issue getting people for ongoing support on it. Pinning such inportance on the actual language isn't what .NET is about, it was designed to be language neutral.

Most roles stipulate VB or C# and if running a dev project i'd generally expect to be given the say in what language I choose, not the other way round.

[eek]

I bet you billed considerably less for those 3 hours than I did during the 3 months I spent learning C#.

Fool, was it?

1 year renewal there and then with more pay so I can't complain. What's more it was local and the market was tulip at the time.

[StopTheEarthIwantToGetOff]

I worked with Classic ASP for several years before ASP.NET came along, and the obvious path was to switch to .NET. But I couldn't stand it. All the simplicity and flexibility which I had always loved about web developing, and still do love, was sucked away. Doing anything even mildly unusual involved horrible work-arounds and compromises. And I hated the feeling of not really knowing what .NET was doing, not having the control to tweak things, and having it spew out HTML which was often almost incomprehensible.

I presume that things have changed now, and .NET suits programmers who don't particularly care about the front-end, but to me it was akin to those old-school car mechanics who had always fixed things with a wrench and a screwdriver and suddenly found they were dealing with sealed modules and circuit-boards which had to be swapped out and the car rebooted and then it would work - but how was it working?

Maybe this guy just prefers people on a personal level who like to really have control over what everything does. Those people aren't better or smarter, and may even be completely deluded and stuck in the mud, but they have a different approach to the Web and to application development as well, and I guess he's just found that they are more suited to the kind of work he does.

Fortunately, web development is now almost invariably split between server-side and front-end on a never-the-twain arrangement, so you just ask the .NET or Java developer to return x, y and z when you request it with your AJAX call or whatever. They seem quite happy to do that, and probably don't give a toss what you do with it on the client-side.

.NET developers are terribly touchy as well, I've noticed.

Hmmm I suspect you have never really used ASP.NET (not just .NET as there is a big difference)
I shall address your points in order.

Its still possible and always has been to munge the server side code into the HTML markup and get access to any of the same services you could in classic ASP.
You only have to do horrid workarounds if you don't know how to utilise the framework.
That incomprehensible markup ASP.NET emitted was a direct result of you using the extremely poor VS2003 designer. You always had the option to hand code it.
There is and never was any mystery in how the HTML is emitted, except maybe to people who may also be mystified about why it gets dark at night times.
You do not understand AJAX, so just forget about it.