这是个笑话吗？ [英] Is that a joke ?

问题描述

这就是我在.NET中开发时一直在问自己的问题。这是一个玩笑吗？或者只是一个糟糕的梦想？


..NET很慢，实际上很慢只是一个礼貌的词我可以在一个新闻组。


..NET只是一个虚拟机，在JIT之前和之后它的工作速度非常慢。我不知道为什么有些人坚持认为可以将虚拟机与本机代码进行比较。我真的感到恶心，无论何时将原生C ++代码与移植到C＃的相同代码进行比较。我不知道

数据库或企业解决方案的性能损失是什么，但我的数学/ CAE函数运行时间较慢

在.NET中。


托管代码可能足够快，适用于企业应用程序，数据库前端

或asp内部网。对于Java或VB开发人员来说，它看起来很快，但对实时应用程序来说是什么？b / b
CAD，CAE，CAM，科学应用程序，实用程序，数学怎么样？ ，成像，

桌面出版等。编写此类应用程序的开发人员应该怎样做？b $ b必须做什么？将它们移植到UNIX中？


二十年前我所知道的规则怎么了？ 任何事物的下一个版本

应该至少比前一个版本更快更稳定


我对MS开发人员有很多疑问，尽管我我相信没有人能够回答这个问题。


1. .NET只是企业发展的一种方法吗？


2.或与Sun's Java的另一场战斗


3.或MS的结论表明性能不再重要


4.如果.NET对于WinFS，Office或Longhorn来说速度慢，那么为什么我们必须相信这对我们自己的应用来说很快？


5如果微软想要一个新的API，为什么必须基于VM技术？


6.为什么MS称.NET为安全？框架，安全从什么？来自黑客的安全，我不会这么做，他们可以在非托管代码中写下他们想要的东西。来自mem泄漏的安全

，垃圾收集器并不能成为优秀的程序员或安全的b $ b b应用程序。我仍然想知道安全是什么意味着。


7.由于WF2，Winforms1将会过时。由于Avalon，WF2将变得过时

。那他们为什么介绍他们？只是有一些东西

隐藏Win32 / GDI电话？


8. Longhorn驱动程序，内核和任何低级别的东西将用

本机代码编写。 LH也必须在64位处理器中运行，因此本机代码必须是在64位API调用中本地编译的
。这意味着Win32将成为Win64。

为什么MS不能简单地将WinFX实现为Win32 / 64 API的OO前端，

将VM省略？


9.盖茨先生，为什么洗脑？你可以欺骗一些企业，而不是我们其他人曾经手工优化我们的代码，只需

来获得速度。


最后，向所有为...工作的聪明科学家提出一个单词问题，为什么？


请不要试图改变我的意见，你不能。顺便说一句，我不是那些用来称微软为M $的愚蠢家伙。我和我的所有同事

自1982年以来一直使用Microsoft开发工具，我们都知道确切的是什么是
JIT，VM和原生编译器。


我真的很喜欢.NET / WinFX作为一个库而C＃作为一种现代语言，但是我感到厌倦了所有浪费处理能力和缺乏性能的人。


问候


Ted Nicols

That''s what I keep asking myself whenever develop in .NET. Is this a joke a
farse or just a bad dream?

..NET is slow, actually slow is just a polite word I can use in a newsgroup.

..NET is just a VM and as one it works very slowly, before and after JIT. I
don''t understand why some people insist that a VM can be compared with
native code. I really feel sick, whenever compare native C++ code against
the same code ported to C#. I don''t know what is the performance loss with
databases or corporate solutions but my math/CAE functions run times slower
in .NET.

Managed code might be fast enough for enterprise apps, database front ends
or asp intranets. It probably looks fast to Java or VB developers but what
about real time applications?

What about CAD, CAE, CAM, scientific applications, utilities, math, imaging,
desktop publishing etc. What should developers who write such applications
must do ? Port them into UNIX ?

What happened to the rule i knew twenty years ago? "Next version of anything
should be at least faster and more stable than the previous one"

I have many questions for MS developers, although I''m sure nobody will ever
answer.

1. Is .NET just an approach to enterprise development?

2. Or another battle with Sun''s Java

3. Or an MS conclusion that performance doesn''t matter any more

4. If .NET was slow for WinFS, Office or Longhorn then why we have to
believe that is fast for our own applications?

5. If Microsoft want a new API why that must be based on VM technology?

6. Why MS call .NET a "safe" framework, safe from what? Safe from hackers, I
don''t thin so, they can write anything they want in unmanaged code. Safe
from mem leaks, a garbage collector doesn''t make good programmers or safe
applications. I still wonder what "safe" means.

7. Winforms1 will become obsolete because of WF2. WF2 will become obsolete
because of Avalon. Then why they introduced them? Just to have something
that hides Win32/GDI calls?

8. Longhorn drivers, kernel and anything "low-level" will be written in
native code. LH must run in 64bit processors too, so native code must be
natively compiled in 64bit API calls. That means Win32 will become Win64.
Why MS don''t simply implement WinFX as an OO frontend to Win32/64 API,
leaving out the VM?

9. Mr Gates, why all that brain wash? You can fool some enterprise
programmers but not the rest of us who used to hand-optimise our code, just
to gain speed.

Finally, a single word question to all those bright scientists who work for
MS, Why ?

Please don''t try to change my opinion, you cannot. By the way I''m not one of
those stupid guys who use to call Microsoft as M$. Me and all my colleagues
use Microsoft development tools since 1982 and we all know what exactly are
JIT, VM and native compiler.

I really like .NET/WinFX as a library and C# as a modern language, but I
feel sick with all that waste of processing power and lack of performance.

Regards

Ted Nicols

推荐答案

。我和我的所有同事

自1982年以来一直使用Microsoft开发工具，我们都知道确切的是什么是
JIT，VM和原生编译器。


我真的很喜欢.NET / WinFX作为一个库而C＃作为一种现代语言，但是我感到厌倦了所有浪费处理能力和缺乏性能的人。


Ted Nicols

. Me and all my colleagues
use Microsoft development tools since 1982 and we all know what exactly are
JIT, VM and native compiler.

I really like .NET/WinFX as a library and C# as a modern language, but I
feel sick with all that waste of processing power and lack of performance.

Regards

Ted Nicols

Ted，

Ted,

CAD，CAE，CAM，科学应用程序，实用程序，数学，成像，桌面出版等等。

What about CAD, CAE, CAM, scientific applications, utilities, math,
imaging, desktop publishing etc.

你能给我代表的百分比人们，在

保险公司和银行工作，这些商业明智地忙于上面写的你b $ b。 （而不是真正的桌面出版不是像Word那样的东西。


也许给出了关于真实业务的想法。


Cor

Can you give me the percentage that represents the people, working at
insurance companies and banks, which are business wise busy with what you
wrote above. (and than real desktop publishing not things as Word.

Maybe gives that an idea about real business.

Cor

- > 1. .NET只是企业开发的一种方法吗？

- > 2.或者与Sun的Java的另一场战斗

- > 3.或MS的结论表明性能不再重要


我不推荐使用C＃（绝对不是VB）编写一个3D

FPS，也不是一个CAD应用程序。但是，为了合理，你绝对不能用绝大多数语言编写
。这不是他们在这里的意思;如果

MS''重新发明轮子'，有人会高兴吗？我在VB中开发了许多有用的应用程序.NET运行速度与它们需要的速度一样快。使用C ++甚至VB6，
将是非生产性浪费时间。看看
sharpDevelop，开源IDE它的运行与Delphi相当，

本地编译，但sharpDevelop是用C＃编写的。

- > 4.如果.NET对于WinFS，Office或Longhorn来说速度慢，那么我们为什么要相信这对我们自己的应用程序来说很快？


没有人强迫你使用.NET。有无数种语言

那里......随你挑选。对于我，我的应用程序，以及我已经看过并运行的

应用程序，它运行良好。


- > 5.如果微软想要一个新的API为什么必须基于VM

技术？


首先，MS被打耳光，因为Java就是这样的东西未来然后，他们被打了一巴掌，因为他们复制了他们的竞争对手。如果世界不想要一个VM API，那么MS就不会想要它。在本机编译的
框架中有许多不可能或接近它的东西。而对于大多数应用程序来说，速度并不是一个杀戮问题，

因此VM工作得很好。


- > 6.为什么MS称.NET为安全的框架，安全从什么？来自

黑客的安全，我不瘦，他们可以写任何他们想要的东西

非托管代码。从垃圾收集器泄漏安全，垃圾收集器不会使优秀的程序员或安全的应用程序。我仍然想知道什么是安全

的意思。


安全是一个松散的术语。 "安全"可能意味着最终，将有b $ b没有非托管代码。 "安全"可能意味着更多人可以使用良好实践创建更有用的应用程序，而不必担心垃圾收集等等。当PC出现时，许多人对于从打字机切换时都很谨慎。 在电脑上，人们不必担心打字错误！他们不会那么小心!!!

哲学在多大程度上我们学到了它，所以新一代必须学习它。得到

他们？


- > 7.由于WF2，Winforms1将过时。由于Avalon，WF2将变为

已过时
。那他们为什么介绍他们？只需要

一些东西

隐藏Win32 / GDI电话？


想想这里的实验。考虑到自MS Windows变得很好以来已经过去不到三十年b $ b年，我作为一名开发人员，当一个新的，更好的想法完全黯然失色时，我愿意宽恕过去

创新。此外，WF和Avalon的想法确实有助于RAD

开发者。


- > 8. Longhorn驱动程序，内核和任何低级驱动程序。将用本机代码编写的
。 LH也必须在64位处理器中运行，因此本机

代码必须在64位API调用中进行本机编译。这意味着Win32

将成为Win64。为什么MS不能简单地将WinFX作为OO

前端到Win32 / 64 API，而忽略了VM？


嗯，那就是太棒了这就是他们用Win16做的错误，所有

原生的东西都不能在Win32机器上运行。使用正确的
制作虚拟机，转换到Win64，最终转换为Win128，将更容易。


- > ;盖茨先生，为什么洗脑？你可以欺骗一些企业，而不是我们其他人曾经手工优化我们的代码，

只是为了获得速度。


他出去为MS赚钱，他出去宣传他的产品。大脑

洗是暴虐政权中发生的事情。


- >最后，向所有那些为MS工作的聪明的科学家提出一个单词问题，为什么？


自由国家，自由选择敲响了钟声。如果他们喜欢它并且喜欢它，那就让我们好吧。你不必为MS工作;如果你相信的所有

都是正确的，加入竞争对手，按照

法律（病毒证明什么都没有）与他们作斗争，再一次，如果你这是正确的，

世界将来找你。


- >请不要试图改变我的观点，你不能。


为什么你问这些问题呢？ Arrr ......我得到了作家的抽筋

什么都没有:)


- >顺便说一句，我不是那些愚蠢的家伙之一，他们打电话给微软作为M

--> 1. Is .NET just an approach to enterprise development?
--> 2. Or another battle with Sun''s Java
--> 3. Or an MS conclusion that performance doesn''t matter any more

I wouldn''t recommend using C# (and definitely not VB) to program a 3D
FPS, nor a CAD application. But, to be reasonable, you couldn''t do it
in the vast majority of languages. That''s not what they''re here for; if
MS ''reinvented the wheel'', would anyone be pleased? I develop many
useful applications in VB.NET that run as fast as they need to. It
would be an unproductive waste of time to use C++ or even VB6. Look at
sharpDevelop, the open source IDE. It runs quite on par with Delp
which is natively compiled, but sharpDevelop is written in C#.
--> 4. If .NET was slow for WinFS, Office or Longhorn then why we have
to believe that is fast for our own applications?

Nobody is forcing you to use .NET. There are a myriad of languages out
there... take your pick. For me, and my applications, and the
applications I''ve seen written and run, it works well enough.

--> 5. If Microsoft want a new API why that must be based on VM
technology?

First, MS gets slapped because "Java is the thing of the future". Then,
they get slapped because "they copy their competition". If the world
didn''t want a VM API, MS wouldn''t have made it. There are many things
that impossible or close to it to implement in a natively compiled
framework. And for the majority of apps, speed is not a killing issue,
so VMs work just fine.

--> 6. Why MS call .NET a "safe" framework, safe from what? Safe from
hackers, I don''t thin so, they can write anything they want in
unmanaged code. Safe from mem leaks, a garbage collector doesn''t make
good programmers or safe applications. I still wonder what "safe"
means.

"safe" is a loose term. "safe" could mean that eventually, there will
be no unmanaged code. "safe" could mean that more people could create
more useful applications using good practices without worrying about
garbage collection and the like. When the PC came out, many were wary
about switching from the typewriter. "On the PC, people don''t have to
worry about typos! They won''t be as careful!!!" How far did that
philosophy of "we learned it, so the new generation must learn it" get
them?

--> 7. Winforms1 will become obsolete because of WF2. WF2 will become
obsolete
because of Avalon. Then why they introduced them? Just to have
something
that hides Win32/GDI calls?

Think experimentation here. Considering the fact that less than thirty
years have passed since MS Windows became great, I as a developer am
willing to be forgiving when a new, better idea totally eclipses a past
innovation. Besides, the WF and Avalon ideas sure help out RAD
developers.

--> 8. Longhorn drivers, kernel and anything "low-level" will be
written in native code. LH must run in 64bit processors too, so native
code must be natively compiled in 64bit API calls. That means Win32
will become Win64. Why MS don''t simply implement WinFX as an OO
frontend to Win32/64 API, leaving out the VM?

Well, that''d be great. That''s the mistake they made with Win16, all
native stuff that won''t run right on a Win32 machine. With a properly
made VM, the transition to Win64, and eventually Win128, will be
easier.

--> 9. Mr Gates, why all that brain wash? You can fool some enterprise
programmers but not the rest of us who used to hand-optimise our code,
just to gain speed.

He''s out to make money for MS, he''s out to promote his products. Brain
wash is what happens in tyrannical regimes.

--> Finally, a single word question to all those bright scientists who
work for MS, Why ?

Free Country, Freedom of Choice rings a bell. If they like it and love
it, let''m be. You don''t have to work for MS; if you''re correct in all
that you believe, join a competitor, fight against them following the
law (viruses prove nothing), and once again, if you''re correct, the
world will come to you.

--> Please don''t try to change my opinion, you cannot.

Why''d you ask all these questions, then? Arrr... I got writer''s cramp
for nothing :)

--> By the way I''m not one of those stupid guys who use to call
Microsoft as M

这篇关于这是个笑话吗？的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！