wrt VS.NET, haven't written C++ code with it but all the managed C++
stuff looks ugly as hell to me, so I wouldn't be surprised if the C++
experience sucked. However, for C# code, VS.NET is very nice,
especially version 2005 with its refactoring support, code snippets and
IntelliSense. There isn't an open-source/linux IDE that can hold a
candle to Visual Studio (6.0 - 2005) and that's a fact.
My question is this. Your brief experience with Rails and web services; how
was it. Any pointers for me?
Our experience with SOAP4R was not good. We wound up using ERb to
generate XML docs and sending them via HTTP POST to our ASP.NET web
service. SOAP4R barfed something awful on our ASMX-generated WSDL -
which does not use any bizarre XSD stuff nor estoeric WSDL features.
I had a similar experience when I first started experimenting with
SOAP4R with the Amazon Web Services - I wound up doing everything via
their REST interfaces instead.
Hopefully you'll have a better experience with SOAP4R but I couldn't
imagine a simpler "real" interface than the one that we expose -
essentially arrays of structs that contain strings (and only strings).
Cheers,
-John
John Lam wrote:
3) SQL Express - if you want a free database there's nothing out there
that comes even close to this (although you'll have to pony up for a
Win2K3 Web Server Edition license so the overall package still costs
you money so it will play a bit of havoc with scale-out economics).
I beg to differ: Firebird ( http://firebird.sourceforge.net ) is the King of Open Source, free databases.
A decade ago Firebird (then named Interbase) it was sold as a commercial database, being used for quite demanding tasks, both on Windows and Unix.
Firebird is fast, extremely stable, with lots of features not available even on commercial databases.
QZZ
IntelliJ's IDEA and even Eclipse (for Java, anyway) both have more
refactoring tools, better code templating support, and a much bigger
"after market" plugin library than VS 6.0 had.
Granted, I've only seen beta-2, and time will grow the VS plugin
market for sure, but it's still got some room to catch up.
···
On 6/28/05, xmlblog@gmail.com <xmlblog@gmail.com> wrote:
wrt VS.NET, haven't written C++ code with it but all the managed C++
stuff looks ugly as hell to me, so I wouldn't be surprised if the C++
experience sucked. However, for C# code, VS.NET is very nice,
especially version 2005 with its refactoring support, code snippets and
IntelliSense. There isn't an open-source/linux IDE that can hold a
candle to Visual Studio (6.0 - 2005) and that's a fact.
Since we're mentioning Java IDEs, Netbeans is pretty good too. It has
great XML/Html support. It's been getting a *lot* more polished
recently.
The funny thing is that since I started using ruby, I haven't *needed*
anything more than a text editor like Scite or TextMate. It's odd not
hitting ctrl-space every ten seconds 
.adam sanderson
Michael Campbell wrote:
···
On 6/28/05, xmlblog@gmail.com <xmlblog@gmail.com> wrote:
> wrt VS.NET, haven't written C++ code with it but all the managed C++
> stuff looks ugly as hell to me, so I wouldn't be surprised if the C++
> experience sucked. However, for C# code, VS.NET is very nice,
> especially version 2005 with its refactoring support, code snippets and
> IntelliSense. There isn't an open-source/linux IDE that can hold a
> candle to Visual Studio (6.0 - 2005) and that's a fact.IntelliJ's IDEA and even Eclipse (for Java, anyway) both have more
refactoring tools, better code templating support, and a much bigger
"after market" plugin library than VS 6.0 had.Granted, I've only seen beta-2, and time will grow the VS plugin
market for sure, but it's still got some room to catch up.
Adam Sanderson said:
The funny thing is that since I started using ruby, I haven't *needed*
anything more than a text editor like Scite or TextMate. It's odd not
hitting ctrl-space every ten seconds
Exactly. I've begun to realize that the need for an IDE like Eclipse or
NetBeans or whatever to be productive in Java (or another language like
C#) seems to indicate to me a flaw in the language. Well maybe flaw is a
bad term, but clearly the language is hard to program in if it requires
such a massive environment for the best productivity.
Still a lot of the features of these IDEs would be nice in Ruby, but the
fact that we can still be very productive without them sure makes Ruby
seem that much better.
Ryan