Re: [DOTNET] OT: Microsoft bags another C++ star - Herb Sutter

Good news! - Original Message - From: "Sam Gentile" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, June 01, 2002 4:30 PM Subject: [DOTNET] OT: Microsoft bags another C++ star - Herb Sutter > This is slightly off-topic but does reveal some significant insight into > how Micr

Re: [DOTNET] Best Practice for Passing Arguments

I assume you are asking about the general condition where you are defining a method that needs to have more than 4 or so arguments passed to it, so I'll approach it that way. I'm not a fan of passing arrays for something like that. Here's why: 1. You lose type safety. Your example is a rare occ

[DOTNET] FW: XML or Universal Type System? (Was RE: Advice)

This may be opening up a can of worms but I have been puzzled why some folks in the XML world get a bit uncomfortable when folks start pushing a binary format. I am beginning to realize that perhaps it is because at that point, it really isn't XML anymore, at least not in the XML 1.0 sense of

Re: [DOTNET] Search the DOTNET archives

Great! Thanks, Shawn Wildermuth [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -Original Message- > From: The DOTNET list will be retired 7/1/02 > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Mike Woodring > Sent: Saturday, June 01, 2002 3:49 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [DOTNET] Search the DOTNET archive

Re: [DOTNET] Fonts

Does the fontFamily object cover all fonts in the fonts folder on the client? If not then a check of the folder would solve that real quick. - Original Message - From: Ian Griffiths <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 5:03 AM Subject: Re: [DOTNET] Fonts

[DOTNET] OT: Microsoft bags another C++ star - Herb Sutter

This is slightly off-topic but does reveal some significant insight into how Microsoft does view C++ and MC++ in .NET. I am clearly impressed. With Herb and Stan on the same C++ team, the product is in great hands. On my blog at http://radio.weblogs.com/0105852/ and DevX original story at http:

Re: [DOTNET] Search the DOTNET archives

Yes - the plan is to provide a way to search multiple archives with one click. - Original Message - From: "Peter Foreman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, June 01, 2002 9:07 AM Subject: [DOTNET] Search the DOTNET archives > Searching the archive has always bee

Re: [DOTNET] byte[] to Object

>>Wouldn't this confuse the GC. It seems like the GC wouldn't 'know' what type the memory >>is. What if aMsg had a finalizer. I think it is only possible to use value types like this. Object references cannot be used. -Original Message- From: David Ferguson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]

[DOTNET] Search the DOTNET archives

Searching the archive has always been a good source of information in the dotnet list, and the atl/dcom lists before them. Given the new partitioning, is there going to be an easy way to search multiple list-archives at once? At a minimum it should be new group + old DOTNET, and I'd prefer if

Re: [DOTNET] Administrative Announcement - Please Read

--- Bill Schmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thomas, > > Your suggestion about DOTNET-DATA seems like a good one, and I would > support it. However, this shows the folly of partitioning the list, at all. Too right. There I was trying to tell the difference between DOTNET and ADVANCED-DOTNET,

[DOTNET] ANN: Windows Developer News

I'm hosting a message board dedicated to Windows Developer News on my site [1]. Thanks to Brad Wilson for his message board code [2]. Chris Sells http://www.sellsbrothers.com/ [1] http://www.sellsbrothers.com/#news [2] http://www.quality.nu/dotnetguy/2002/03/09.aspx#a25 You can read messages fr

Re: [DOTNET] byte[] to Object

Wouldn't this confuse the GC. It seems like the GC wouldn't 'know' what type the memory is. What if aMsg had a finalizer. Would the GC call it? Are there some documented rules on how this situation should be handled? - Original Message - From: "Eric Gunnerson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To:

Re: [DOTNET] Administrative Announcement - Please Read

Actually I would love to see all the ml's on developmentor on a newsgroup server partitioned into the groups that this ml will be split into. NG's are a more convinient way to maintain multiple subscriptions. The only reason I stay with this ML is becuase the high quality of replies and the high r

Re: [DOTNET] Administrative Announcement - Please Read

> The problem that this list partioning is designed to solve (excessive list > volume) would be fixed if we could wave a magic wand and eliminate all off- > topic or personal posts. To a degree yes, but there are also quite a few on-topic threads that I'm not interested in at the moment that I mu

[DOTNET] syntax across languages

http://merd.net/pixel/language-study/syntax-across-languages.html What's this about? * Language Designers: Looking for operator or function names? Well have a look at the following and remember using existing one may ease the transition :) * Language Users: You know one langua

Re: [DOTNET] Administrative Announcement - Please Read

I agree. > This is the right way, thanks! > One question: > what about ADO.NET postings? > > often they are > - SQL (language&server) problems, > - OLE DB related > - or very specific to one of the (new native) data providers! You can read messages from the DOTNET archive, unsubscribe from

Re: [DOTNET] Administrative Announcement - Please Read

Thomas, Your suggestion about DOTNET-DATA seems like a good one, and I would support it. However, this shows the folly of partioning the list, at all. In the absence of a DOTNET-DATA list, you might post your ADO.NET question to the DOTNET-CLR list (probably best), or you could pick one of the o

Re: [DOTNET] Administrative Announcement - Please Read

I second this... Thanks, Shawn Wildermuth [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -Original Message- > From: The DOTNET list will be retired 7/1/02 > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Thomas Scheidegger > Sent: Saturday, June 01, 2002 2:11 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [DOTNET] Administra