By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
424,968 Members | 1,588 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 424,968 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

Learn C# 2003 now, or wait for C# 2005?

P: n/a
Hello,

I am thinking of spending some holiday time reading the third edition
of Programming C# by Jesse Liberty, using Visual C# .Net Standard 2003.

But I see at www.oreilly.com that a new fourth edition of that book is
due out in Feb 2005, and I see in this newsgroup that C# 2005 is
forthcoming.

Does it make sense to go ahead with the third edition of the book using
C# 2003, or should I wait for the fourth edition of the book and C#
2005?

Has a date been announced when a C# 2005 boxed product will be
available?

Thanks.

Jim

Nov 16 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
10 Replies


P: n/a
The date I have heard is "first half 2005", which probably means
summertime next year. Another date I heard was for the Pacific
Developer's Conference 2005 in LA, which I think is later in the year.

Yes, you should go ahead with C# 2003. Here is why.

1. The differences in the core language are not radical. The biggest
addition (from my point of view) is generics. However, this adds to,
but doesn't change how the core language works. This is not a Visual
Basic situation in which the whole language changes and you "can't do
it that way any more."

2. The important part of learning C# is not learning C#. It's learning
the .NET Framework. While the Framework is bound to change along with
C# 2005, I doubt that there will be much flux in the basic classes that
you would pick up as a beginner, so the knowledge should transfer
nicely.

Nov 16 '05 #2

P: n/a
Bruce Wood <br*******@canada.com> wrote:
The date I have heard is "first half 2005", which probably means
summertime next year. Another date I heard was for the Pacific
Developer's Conference 2005 in LA, which I think is later in the year.

Yes, you should go ahead with C# 2003. Here is why.

1. The differences in the core language are not radical. The biggest
addition (from my point of view) is generics. However, this adds to,
but doesn't change how the core language works. This is not a Visual
Basic situation in which the whole language changes and you "can't do
it that way any more."
That's true.
2. The important part of learning C# is not learning C#. It's learning
the .NET Framework. While the Framework is bound to change along with
C# 2005, I doubt that there will be much flux in the basic classes that
you would pick up as a beginner, so the knowledge should transfer
nicely.


Not sure I agree with that - I don't think there's much point in
learning the "old" collection classes when the new generic ones will
probably be used in almost all situations.

Personally, if I were starting now and didn't need to ship anything
until after .NET 2 came out, I'd install the beta of VS.NET 2005 (or
Visual C# Express Edition if I didn't have MSDN) and play with that.
The changes in IDE are likely to be pretty significant.

--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.com>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too
Nov 16 '05 #3

P: n/a
Hello!
Personally, if I were starting now and didn't need to ship anything
until after .NET 2 came out, I'd install the beta of VS.NET 2005 (or
Visual C# Express Edition if I didn't have MSDN) and play with that.
The changes in IDE are likely to be pretty significant.


I might warn other developers who haven't been testing the 2005 release yet.
It's almost unbareable to return to the current 2003 IDE, once you've tasted
the forbidden fruit of the 2005 IDE (all the great C# 2.0 enhancements,
generics, IDE enhancements - productive refactoring tools to name one).

Most of us are probably in a position where code needs to ship before .NET
2.0 is released. Having used the 2005 IDE at home for quite some time, I
find that I miss many of the features on a daily basis, working with the
2003 IDE.

You've been warned :-)

To answer the question from the initial poster, I would recommend getting
started on the 2005 IDE right away. Ofcourse, this is depending if you've
been asked to ship code before 2.0 is out (not sure that sentence came out
right .. :-).

--
venlig hilsen / with regards
anders borum (mcp)
--
Nov 16 '05 #4

P: n/a
I think the fundemental thing I'd say here is that you do yourself a disservice *not* learning C# now if you are going to learn it in the future. There are a bunch of new features in the language and base class library but in reality most things are stying the same. Getting 3 months headstart before jesse's new book comes out (if thats what you are basing your metric on) will only be a good thing.

Regards

Richard Blewett - DevelopMentor
http://www.dotnetconsult.co.uk/weblog
http://www.dotnetconsult.co.uk
2. The important part of learning C# is not learning C#. It's learning
the .NET Framework. While the Framework is bound to change along with
C# 2005, I doubt that there will be much flux in the basic classes that
you would pick up as a beginner, so the knowledge should transfer
nicely.


Not sure I agree with that - I don't think there's much point in
learning the "old" collection classes when the new generic ones will
probably be used in almost all situations.

Personally, if I were starting now and didn't need to ship anything
until after .NET 2 came out, I'd install the beta of VS.NET 2005 (or
Visual C# Express Edition if I didn't have MSDN) and play with that.
The changes in IDE are likely to be pretty significant.

Nov 16 '05 #5

P: n/a
All true, Jon, but the OP was asking if he should _wait_ to learn C#
until the book on C# 2005 comes out, or start now. My point was that
the changes are not so radical that anything he learns now using 2003
would be throwaway. 99% of his beginner knowledge would transfer to the
new world of 2005, IMHO.

Nov 16 '05 #6

P: n/a
Bruce Wood <br*******@canada.com> wrote:
All true, Jon, but the OP was asking if he should _wait_ to learn C#
until the book on C# 2005 comes out, or start now. My point was that
the changes are not so radical that anything he learns now using 2003
would be throwaway. 99% of his beginner knowledge would transfer to the
new world of 2005, IMHO.


I agree that there's no need to wait - but I'd not wait and still start
learning 2005.

--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.com>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too
Nov 16 '05 #7

P: n/a
Words of wisdom :-)
They should be written with bold red fonts size = 178 on the download site.

--
Miha Markic [MVP C#] - RightHand .NET consulting & development
SLODUG - Slovene Developer Users Group
www.rthand.com

"Anders Borum [.NET/C# MCP]" <an****@sphereworks.dk> wrote in message
news:uC**************@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
I might warn other developers who haven't been testing the 2005 release
yet.
It's almost unbareable to return to the current 2003 IDE, once you've
tasted
the forbidden fruit of the 2005 IDE (all the great C# 2.0 enhancements,
generics, IDE enhancements - productive refactoring tools to name one).

Most of us are probably in a position where code needs to ship before .NET
2.0 is released. Having used the 2005 IDE at home for quite some time, I
find that I miss many of the features on a daily basis, working with the
2003 IDE.

You've been warned :-)

Nov 16 '05 #8

P: n/a
Thanks for all the excellent advice.

I ran hot and cold for a few days whether to begin with C# 2003, but in
the end, I opened the box (can't return it now) and took it for a spin.

It's a nice product. It sure reminds me of Java from my Java holiday a
couple of years ago (Java, Linux, Tomcat, Servlets) and it reminds me
of VB6 (which I use in my day job from time to time).

I understand that C# isn't platform independent like Java, but I'd
still have to say that C# is a better Java than Java. The MS (love 'em
or hate 'em) tools are superior, and you get the graphics developed
over years and years and millions/billions of R&D dollars. It shows.
No crummy gray and purple widgets here.

I'm not knocking Java. I hope it wins. But it will have to find a way
to be prettier than it is now.

I am really an embedded software engineer, not a Windows engineer. So
I am more at home with C/C++, POSIX (QNX, Linux, FreeBSD), bash, vim,
make, etc. But most embedded systems require host-based (usually
Windows) admin tools to configure and monitor the embedded system. I
have been using VB6 for that, but it looks to me like C# will be a good
replacement now that VB6 has been retired by MS.

I haven't picked up the Jesse Liberty book yet, but I'll probably do
that the next day or two. For now, I am still working through the
minimal (but interesting) Getting Started booklet that comes with C#
2003. I'll probably buy the Jesse Liberty book twice -- the 3rd
edition now for C# 2003, and the 4th edition in a few months when C#
2005 is out (if I haven't switched back to Python or some other Penguin
software by then).

If I can get some simple serial port and socket stuff talking between
C# and a Linux box in a few days I'll be happy. Since a char is 16
bits in C# (if I read correctly) I am interested to see how I can read
and write byte oriented message structures. Fun stuff.

Merry Christmas, all.

Jim

jf******@aol.com wrote:
Hello,

I am thinking of spending some holiday time reading the third edition
of Programming C# by Jesse Liberty, using Visual C# .Net Standard 2003.
But I see at www.oreilly.com that a new fourth edition of that book is due out in Feb 2005, and I see in this newsgroup that C# 2005 is
forthcoming.

Does it make sense to go ahead with the third edition of the book using C# 2003, or should I wait for the fourth edition of the book and C#
2005?

Has a date been announced when a C# 2005 boxed product will be
available?

Thanks.

Jim


Nov 16 '05 #9

P: n/a
You have both of both worlds.

Nov 16 '05 #10

P: n/a
<jf******@aol.com> wrote:

<snip>
I understand that C# isn't platform independent like Java, but I'd
still have to say that C# is a better Java than Java. The MS (love 'em
or hate 'em) tools are superior, and you get the graphics developed
over years and years and millions/billions of R&D dollars. It shows.
No crummy gray and purple widgets here.

I'm not knocking Java. I hope it wins. But it will have to find a way
to be prettier than it is now.


<snip>

Sounds like you either haven't used Java for a while, or you haven't
used any Swing theme other than "Metal".

Look at something like:
http://www.jgoodies.com/freeware/loo.../looksdemo.png

No crummy grey and purple widgets there, either.

As for development tools, I personally prefer Eclipse to VS.NET 2003.
I'm looking forward to seeing what VS.NET 2005 can do though - it
sounds rather sweet. You can download Eclipse for free from
http://www.eclipse.org

--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.com>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too
Nov 16 '05 #11

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.