471,354 Members | 1,753 Online
Bytes | Software Development & Data Engineering Community
Post +

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Join Bytes to post your question to a community of 471,354 software developers and data experts.

Generics article

Hi,
I wrote an article about generics in C# 2.0; you can download it at
http://www.coders-lab.be/Technical%2...s_Generics.pdf
Suggestions and feedback always very welcome,
kind regards,
Ludwig

--
Ludwig
http://www.goedgenoegen.be
Jan 28 '06 #1
13 1626
Ludwig <no@email.be> wrote:
I wrote an article about generics in C# 2.0; you can download it at
http://www.coders-lab.be/Technical%2...s_Generics.pdf
Suggestions and feedback always very welcome,


Without having read it - I see no particular reason why it needs to be
a PDF rather than HTML. It would be easier to use as straight HTML,
IMO.

--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.com>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too
Jan 28 '06 #2
On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 23:10:52 -0000, Jon Skeet [C# MVP]
<sk***@pobox.com> wrote:
Ludwig <no@email.be> wrote:
I wrote an article about generics in C# 2.0; you can download it at
http://www.coders-lab.be/Technical%2...s_Generics.pdf
Suggestions and feedback always very welcome,


Without having read it - I see no particular reason why it needs to be
a PDF rather than HTML. It would be easier to use as straight HTML,
IMO.


Converting my doc to pdf preserves lay-out. Converting to HTML, well,
it's not the same anymore. Therefore, it's a pdf.
--
Ludwig
http://www.goedgenoegen.be
Jan 28 '06 #3
Ludwig,
if you want readership (which I guess you'd like, since you've been kind
enough to post about it on this group) I'd recommend you offer the article in
HTML, with an option to download as PDF. As with everything in life, there
are trade-offs. HTML means more readership and - these days - it also means
better indexing by the search engines; not a small matter at all.
Peter

--
Co-founder, Eggheadcafe.com developer portal:
http://www.eggheadcafe.com
UnBlog:
http://petesbloggerama.blogspot.com


"Ludwig" wrote:
Hi,
I wrote an article about generics in C# 2.0; you can download it at
http://www.coders-lab.be/Technical%2...s_Generics.pdf
Suggestions and feedback always very welcome,
kind regards,
Ludwig

--
Ludwig
http://www.goedgenoegen.be

Jan 28 '06 #4
On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 15:42:27 -0800, "Peter Bromberg [C# MVP]"
<pb*******@yahoo.nospammin.com> wrote:
Ludwig,
if you want readership (which I guess you'd like, since you've been kind
enough to post about it on this group) I'd recommend you offer the article in
HTML, with an option to download as PDF. As with everything in life, there
are trade-offs. HTML means more readership and - these days - it also means
better indexing by the search engines; not a small matter at all.
Peter


I uploaded the html version:
http://www.coders-lab.be/Technical%2...ics/index.html

There's a link to the pdf version.
--
Ludwig
http://www.goedgenoegen.be
Jan 29 '06 #5
Ludwig <no@email.be> wrote:
Without having read it - I see no particular reason why it needs to be
a PDF rather than HTML. It would be easier to use as straight HTML,
IMO.


Converting my doc to pdf preserves lay-out. Converting to HTML, well,
it's not the same anymore. Therefore, it's a pdf.


Not being exactly the same isn't necessarily a bad thing though. For
instance, I've got a wide screen laptop - having a fixed width layout
means most of the screen is wasted. PDF is really useful when the
layout is absolutely vital - but I don't see why it is in your article.
The code needs to be preserved as it is, and that's easy to do, but
everything else can be more flexible in HTML.

--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.com>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too
Jan 29 '06 #6
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 02:03:11 +0100, Ludwig <no@email.be> wrote:
On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 15:42:27 -0800, "Peter Bromberg [C# MVP]"
<pb*******@yahoo.nospammin.com> wrote:
Ludwig,
if you want readership (which I guess you'd like, since you've been kind
enough to post about it on this group) I'd recommend you offer the article in
HTML, with an option to download as PDF. As with everything in life, there
are trade-offs. HTML means more readership and - these days - it also means
better indexing by the search engines; not a small matter at all.
Peter


I uploaded the html version:
http://www.coders-lab.be/Technical%2...ics/index.html

There's a link to the pdf version.

Thanks Ludwig.

Although I didn't mind downloading the PDF file, it was nice to see
that I had a choice regarding how I wanted to read it.

Otis Mukinfus
http://www.otismukinfus.com
http://www.tomchilders.com
Jan 29 '06 #7
SP
"Ludwig" <no@email.be> wrote in message
news:ut********************************@4ax.com...
Hi,
I wrote an article about generics in C# 2.0; you can download it at
http://www.coders-lab.be/Technical%2...s_Generics.pdf
Suggestions and feedback always very welcome,
kind regards,
Ludwig


"Boxing and unboxing are very timeconsuming operations and should be
avoided, because they degrade performance. This effect of boxing/unboxing
can be quite significant in scenarios where you must iterate over large
collections. The solution to these problems is creating strongly typed
collections."
How does a strongly typed collection avoid boxing / unboxing of primitive
types (you are talking about .Net 1.1 in this part of the article)?

SP


Jan 29 '06 #8
SP <ec***********@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Ludwig" <no@email.be> wrote in message
news:ut********************************@4ax.com...
Hi,
I wrote an article about generics in C# 2.0; you can download it at
http://www.coders-lab.be/Technical%2...s_Generics.pdf
Suggestions and feedback always very welcome,
kind regards,
Ludwig


"Boxing and unboxing are very timeconsuming operations and should be
avoided, because they degrade performance. This effect of boxing/unboxing
can be quite significant in scenarios where you must iterate over large
collections. The solution to these problems is creating strongly typed
collections."
How does a strongly typed collection avoid boxing / unboxing of primitive
types (you are talking about .Net 1.1 in this part of the article)?


You can create a strongly typed collection which uses an array of the
appropriate type underneath the covers (int[], DatTime[] or whatever).

I would take issue with the idea that boxing and unboxing are "very
timeconsuming operations". The problem is that you tend to do them an
awful lot, so even though individually they're cheap, they can mount
up...

--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.com>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too
Jan 30 '06 #9

SP schreef:
"Ludwig" <no@email.be> wrote in message
news:ut********************************@4ax.com...
Hi,
I wrote an article about generics in C# 2.0; you can download it at
http://www.coders-lab.be/Technical%2...s_Generics.pdf
Suggestions and feedback always very welcome,
kind regards,
Ludwig


"Boxing and unboxing are very timeconsuming operations and should be
avoided, because they degrade performance. This effect of boxing/unboxing
can be quite significant in scenarios where you must iterate over large
collections. The solution to these problems is creating strongly typed
collections."
How does a strongly typed collection avoid boxing / unboxing of primitive
types (you are talking about .Net 1.1 in this part of the article)?

SP


Oeps yes, this is confusing, I'll change it. Thanks for the remark.

Jan 30 '06 #10
Indeed, thanks for the remark!

Jan 30 '06 #11
Ludwig wrote:
On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 15:42:27 -0800, "Peter Bromberg [C# MVP]"
<pb*******@yahoo.nospammin.com> wrote:
Ludwig,
if you want readership (which I guess you'd like, since you've been kind
enough to post about it on this group) I'd recommend you offer the article in
HTML, with an option to download as PDF. As with everything in life, there
are trade-offs. HTML means more readership and - these days - it also means
better indexing by the search engines; not a small matter at all.
Peter


I uploaded the html version:
http://www.coders-lab.be/Technical%2...ics/index.html

There's a link to the pdf version.

I know you are looking for criticism, but all I have is praise.

The only other reading of this level that I had done was a free
download, Chapter 10 Understanding Generics from Pro C# 2005 and the
..NET 2.0 Platform by Andrew Troelsen. Your discussion meets and
surpasses the chapter from this book. Probably because your discussion
of IComparable<> and sorting is in a different chapter of his.

I would recommend changing the title of the article to reflect that
sorting and IComparable<> is covered. Having recently implemented a
ComnpareTo in a 1.1 application, the subject was on my mind.
Immediately when I saw you sort Person by calling name.CompareTo(), I
wondered to myself, "Self, what if I wanted to give the programmer
choice on what property to compare and sort." You immediately answered
with your addition of the enum.

Excellent job!
--
Jay R. Wren
Jan 30 '06 #12
SP

<lu***********@coders-lab.be> wrote in message
news:11**********************@g47g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...

SP schreef:
"Ludwig" <no@email.be> wrote in message
news:ut********************************@4ax.com...
> Hi,
> I wrote an article about generics in C# 2.0; you can download it at
> http://www.coders-lab.be/Technical%2...s_Generics.pdf
> Suggestions and feedback always very welcome,
> kind regards,
> Ludwig


"Boxing and unboxing are very timeconsuming operations and should be
avoided, because they degrade performance. This effect of boxing/unboxing
can be quite significant in scenarios where you must iterate over large
collections. The solution to these problems is creating strongly typed
collections."
How does a strongly typed collection avoid boxing / unboxing of primitive
types (you are talking about .Net 1.1 in this part of the article)?

SP


Oeps yes, this is confusing, I'll change it. Thanks for the remark.


Jon Skeet replied to the original question. I was playing the devils
advocate really because you followed with an example that was using
CollectionBase which of course incurs boxing/unboxing with primitive types.
On a second read I did see you mentioned ArrayList but you should probably
mention that inheriting CollectionBase would be for non primitive types.

SP
Jan 30 '06 #13
On Mon, 30 Jan 2006 10:00:39 -0500, "Jay R. Wren" <jr****@gmail.com>
wrote:
I know you are looking for criticism, but all I have is praise.

The only other reading of this level that I had done was a free
download, Chapter 10 Understanding Generics from Pro C# 2005 and the
.NET 2.0 Platform by Andrew Troelsen. Your discussion meets and
surpasses the chapter from this book. Probably because your discussion
of IComparable<> and sorting is in a different chapter of his.

I would recommend changing the title of the article to reflect that
sorting and IComparable<> is covered. Having recently implemented a
ComnpareTo in a 1.1 application, the subject was on my mind.
Immediately when I saw you sort Person by calling name.CompareTo(), I
wondered to myself, "Self, what if I wanted to give the programmer
choice on what property to compare and sort." You immediately answered
with your addition of the enum.

Excellent job!


Thank you for your kind remarks. The following days I'll
correct/extend the article, and also an english-speaking person will
verify the syntax; because English is not my mother tongue :)
--
Ludwig
http://www.goedgenoegen.be
Jan 30 '06 #14

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.

Similar topics

8 posts views Thread by Chris Dunaway | last post: by
9 posts views Thread by sloan | last post: by
18 posts views Thread by riftimes | last post: by
3 posts views Thread by Showjumper | last post: by
8 posts views Thread by Kris Jennings | last post: by
8 posts views Thread by mark.norgate | last post: by
4 posts views Thread by ludwig.stuyck | last post: by
3 posts views Thread by =?Utf-8?B?SmltSGVhdmV5?= | last post: by
1 post views Thread by JosAH | last post: by
reply views Thread by XIAOLAOHU | last post: by

By using Bytes.com and it's services, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

To disable or enable advertisements and analytics tracking please visit the manage ads & tracking page.