2005年的变化。 [英] Changes in 2005.
问题描述
这篇文章并非用于激发，因此请仅提供正面或
内容丰富的回复。
就个人而言，我有点厌倦了对于Framework
类的某些更改等等 - 已经创建了新类来替换旧类
（仅在
中提供不同的位置）
框架）-ConfigurationManager似乎是一个。
和其他事情，如重命名事件，例如表格1.1已经结束
...现在它' FormClosing！是的，他们俩都还在工作，但是一个人在设计师中
（新的）和一个不是。
改变这些事情有什么意义（保持老名字fer gawd
清酒！）将代码从1.1更改为2.0似乎比它应该更加繁琐。
。
Br，
马克。
This post is not intended in inflame, so please provide only positive or
informative replies.
Personally I''m getting a little fed up over certain changes to Framework
classes and such -whereby new classes have been created to replace old ones
(that only appear to offer a different location in the
framework) -ConfigurationManager seems to be one.
And other things such as the renaming of events e.g a form 1.1 had Closing
...now it''s FormClosing! Yes they both still work, but one is in the designer
(new one) and one isn''t.
What is the point of changing things like these (keep the old names fer gawd
sake!) Changing code from 1.1 to 2.0 seems to be more fiddly than it should
be.
Br,
Mark.
推荐答案
我觉得这篇文章很有意思。请参阅The MSDN Magazine Camp。
http：// www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/APIWar.html
- Mark
Mark Broadbent写道：
I found this article interesting. See "The MSDN Magazine Camp."
http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/APIWar.html
-- Mark
Mark Broadbent wrote:
这篇文章的目的不是为了激烈，所以请提供正面的或者提供信息的回复。
我个人对某些变化感到厌烦。 >已经创建了框架类和其他新类来替换旧类（在框架中只提供不同的位置）-ConfigurationManager似乎是一个。
和其他诸如重命名事件之类的事情，例如表格1.1已经关闭..现在它是FormClosing！是的他们俩都还在工作，但有一个是设计师（新人），有一个人不是。
改变这些事情有什么意义（保留原来的名字） gawd缘故吧！）将代码从1.1更改为2.0似乎比它应该更加繁琐。
Br，
Mark。
This post is not intended in inflame, so please provide only positive
or informative replies.
Personally I''m getting a little fed up over certain changes to
Framework classes and such -whereby new classes have been created to
replace old ones (that only appear to offer a different location in
the framework) -ConfigurationManager seems to be one.
And other things such as the renaming of events e.g a form 1.1 had
Closing ..now it''s FormClosing! Yes they both still work, but one is
in the designer (new one) and one isn''t.
What is the point of changing things like these (keep the old names
fer gawd sake!) Changing code from 1.1 to 2.0 seems to be more fiddly
than it should be.
Br,
Mark.
Mark，
所有这些都与向后兼容性有关。人们已经使用这些API编写了
应用程序，并且有意识地进行了一次重大改变，而不是那些使用API的用户所看到的东西。
在FormClosing和FormClosed事件的特定情况下，这些
事件被添加，因为原始的Closed和Closing事件没有
将信息传递给事件处理程序，为什么表单正在关闭（即使VB6提供的内容也是b $ b）。
最后，API总是会改变，
并不总是可以使新版本与旧的声明一起使用。 MS一直致力于向后兼容性，所以我不会因为.NET 2.0问世而采用这种方法而感到惊讶。
希望这会有所帮助。
-
- Nicholas Paldino [.NET / C＃MVP]
- mv*@spam.guard.caspershouse.com
" Mark Broadbent" <无**** @ nospam.com>在消息中写道
新闻：OB ************** @ tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl ...
Mark,
It''s all about backwards compatability. People have written
applications using these APIs, and to consciously make a breaking change is
not something that is viewed upon favorably by those that use the APIs.
In the specific case of the FormClosing and FormClosed events, these
events were added because the original Closed and Closing events didn''t
convey information to the event handler why the form was closing (which was
something that even VB6 offered).
In the end, APIs will always change, and it''s not always possible to
make the new versions work with the old declarations. MS has always been
committed to backwards compatability, so I am not surprized by them taking
this approach as .NET 2.0 comes out.
Hope this helps.
--
- Nicholas Paldino [.NET/C# MVP]
- mv*@spam.guard.caspershouse.com
"Mark Broadbent" <no****@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:OB**************@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
这篇文章不打算在激烈的情况下，所以请仅提供积极的或有用的回复。
我个人对于Framework
类的某些更改感到有点厌倦已被创建以替换旧的
（仅在
框架中提供不同的位置）-ConfigurationManager似乎是一个。
和其他事项，如重命名事件，如表单1.1已关闭
..现在它是FormClosing！是的，他们两个都还在工作，但是一个人在设计师（新人）中，一个人不在。
改变这些事情的重点是什么（保留旧名称）
gawd缘故！）将代码从1.1改为2.0似乎比它应该更加繁琐。
Br，
Mark。
This post is not intended in inflame, so please provide only positive or
informative replies.
Personally I''m getting a little fed up over certain changes to Framework
classes and such -whereby new classes have been created to replace old
ones (that only appear to offer a different location in the
framework) -ConfigurationManager seems to be one.
And other things such as the renaming of events e.g a form 1.1 had Closing
..now it''s FormClosing! Yes they both still work, but one is in the
designer (new one) and one isn''t.
What is the point of changing things like these (keep the old names fer
gawd sake!) Changing code from 1.1 to 2.0 seems to be more fiddly than it
should be.
Br,
Mark.
最后，API总会发生变化，而且并不总是能够使新版本与旧的声明。 MS一直致力于向后兼容，因此我不会因为.NET 2.0问世而采用这种方法而感到惊讶。
In the end, APIs will always change, and it''s not always possible to
make the new versions work with the old declarations. MS has always been
committed to backwards compatability, so I am not surprized by them taking
this approach as .NET 2.0 comes out.
如果VS.Net 2005编译成.Net 1.1会很好......毕竟，2003
编译为非托管代码，所有代码都需要调整才能得到它
编译。
我发现新的IDE很好用，但不一定要坚持使用.Net 2.0的
客户端。
您对Mark Jerde发布的那篇文章有何评论？我发现它最有趣的是
。
Would be nice if VS.Net 2005 compiled to .Net 1.1... After all, 2003
compiles to unmanaged code, all be it the code needs adjusting to get it to
compile.
I find the new IDE great to use, but don''t necessarily want to insist on the
client having .Net 2.0.
Do you have any comments on that article posted by Mark Jerde? I found it
most interesting.
这篇关于2005年的变化。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！
