Sat, 12/1/01

Effective C# is available now from Addison-Wesley. Of course, it’s called Effective Java, but *wow* the overlap is amazing. Some of his items I don’t agree with, e.g. return zero-length arrays instead of null (although I see his side) and others have been “fixed” due to advances in C#, e.g. override clone judiciously, but so much of it makes sense in C# (and .NET in general) that it’s scary. I feel like asking AW for the text so that I can port it to C# over the weekend. : )

A friend of mine stumbled over this in the Microsoft source code:

//  Function:   RunCommandEx
//  Synopsis:   runs the given command in the current session, more robust
//				than RunCommand
//  Arguments:  none
//  Returns:    S_OK if success
//  History:    October 3, 2000 - created [name withheld to protect the guilty]
HRESULT RunCommandEx(LPCWSTR szCmdLine) {
	DWORD dwTry = 0;
	HRESULT hResult = S_OK;

	// try run command 3 times at most
	while (dwTry<4) {
		hResult = RunCommand(szCmdLine);
		if (hResult!=E_FAIL) {
			// we succeeded
			break;
		}
		dwTry++;
	}
	if (dwTry==4) {
		ATLTRACE(L"COuld start the command even we tried 4 times\n");
		ASSERT(FALSE);
	}
	return hResult;
}

That’s not quite my definition of robust, but oh well…

Tue 11/27/2001 3:52 PM

“Steal this song right off my page.” You can find it at http://www.ferncrk.com/jittin.html. Use only in well ventilated area. Do not expose to open flame.

Stuart Celarier
Tue 11/27/2001 3:41 PM

Friday, 11/16/01

Last night, in the middle of .NET Band on the Runtime set, Don announced his retirement from DevelopMentor and training. He’s sorry to be leaving us, of course, as we are to lose him, but he’s excited about doing new things. Running a company gets more consuming as a company gets more successful and Don certainly brought DevelopMentor a great deal of success. And not only did he run his part of the company, but he also brought a amount of rigor and insight to an amazing range of technology topics, including C++, COM, DCOM, RPC, XML, Java and .NET, heretofore unprecedented in the training industry. He turned the phrase “them that can’t; teach” on its ear. But these are things that are well-known of Don.

What is perhaps not so well known is the care and dedication that he had for his friends and colleagues. He worked hard to turn his personal success into opportunities for the other technical staff members at DevelopMentor. And he succeeded. He paved the way for people like Ted Pattison, Keith Brown, Tim Ewald, Aaron Skonnard, Martin Gudgin and a host of others who’s made a name for themselves in this industry. Of course, I’m also on this list. If you look at the things that I’ve got listed on this site, i.e. books, articles, courses, conference talks, etc, a staggering amount of it was enabled either directly or indirectly by Don Box. He’s an amazing man and it’s been an honor and a privilege to work with him these last six years. They’re been the richest of my career and of my life. And for that, I’d like to thank him.

Before we get too blubbery, Don has assured the world that he will continue to pursue technology and to communicate it to an eager audience. I, for one, look forward to what he decides to do next. Whatever it is, I’m sure it will be uniquely Don.

Sun, 11/11/01

Many years ago when Java was new, I dove in. My first program I wrote like a C++ programmer and I didn’t get it. Then I rewrote the program as a Java program and it was much nicer, but I still didn’t get it. Then I discovered the lack of deterministic finalization and that’s all she wrote; my C++ thinking turned me away (the fact that Java was ashamed of my favorite platform and, in fact, all platforms didn’t help).

Now I’ve spent the last year doing .NET programming, mostly focused on Managed C++ and I didn’t get it. I’ve participated in DevelopMentor’s ASP.NET and Guerrilla .NET and loved both of them, but still didn’t get it. I rewrote (with my good friend Jon’s help) my entire web site in ASP.NET and didn’t get it. And I spent most of last week preparing for my teach of the latest version of DevelopMentor’s Essential .NET and I *still* didn’t get it. Until today. Today I finally got it. The major power of Java wasn’t that it was platform independent, as Sun so often touts. The power of Java (and therefore the power of .NET) is that it provides a major productivity boost for the programmer. I realized this today for the first time.

It started yesterday. Yesterday I ported a tiny little application (a time client) from MFC and C++ to .NET and C#. The first time I ported it, I ported it like it was still C++ and the result was ugly (I was trying to do the standard library trick of representing time as a the number of seconds since some marker time and then translating it into a formatted string at the last moment). In fact, I couldn’t even do the nice formatting of the current time since .NET didn’t support that means of conversion. But then I remembered that, unlike C++, .NET has proper date, time and span classes. Once I rewrote it in .NET style, it was a thing of beauty. With knowledge of only the name of the sockets namespace (System.Net), I was able to learn .NET and build a time client in under an hour. To paraphrase the closing sentence of one of my first articles, it just makes you want to grab the back the of computer monitor and feel the power of .NET.

Encouraged by my success and armed with the courage of my convictions (and a couple of web sites given me by Jason and Peter), I sat down to write a MSN Instant Messenger application. Those of you unlucky enough to have me as an IM contact saw me log in and log out about a hundred times yesterday (sorry : ). This was because every step of the way, I’d run my client and every step of the way, I’d make more progress. 90% of my code was reading and writing from the sockets and parsing strings. For the former, I used the StreamReader and StreamWriter and for the latter, I used the Regex class. Both did a ton of heavy lifting so I didn’t have to. It was amazing.

But yesterday, I still didn’t get it. I was so focused on getting my IM client working (about a half day’s work) that I completely missed the magnitude of what I was doing. I was implementing an async notification-based socket protocol after reading an example doc, skimming a spec and digging in. And the code I ended up with wasn’t spaghetti. It wasn’t production ready yet (my error handling, while present, was rudimentary) and I didn’t implement the entire spec, but I had refactored along the way and now I have the beginnings of a nice little namespace for doing IM work. And all of this happened the same day that I first discovered the existence of the System.Net namespace. It’s only after reflection (and a good night’s sleep) that I finally get it. The power of  .NET is the programmer productivity.

This productivity comes from a combination of ease of use and flexibility that’s going to attract almost everyone. It will attract the VB programmers because of the continued ease of use and the new functionality of the .NET Foundation Classes. It’s also going to attract the C++ and the Java programmers for the same reason, but they won’t admit that’s why they like it. They’ll claim to love .NET because of the power and flexibility. Not only are the .NET languages themselves allowed to be fully-featured, but the framework itself has tons of amazing functionality built right in. So much so that it’s easy to miss some of it. When I needed to calculate an MD5 hash in my IM client, I went to the net, downloaded some C++ code and built myself a COM object (although I could have easily built a MC++ component, too) and then brought it into my app via interop (see what not being ashamed of the platform can do? : ). That was great, but this morning Peter asked me why I hadn’t just used the MD5 functionality built into .NET. There’s so much stuff in there that I missed it. As a community, we’ll be digging into it for a long time to come.

In the past, I had scoffed at the value of programmer productive over user productivity. My argument was that programmers are soldiers on the field of combat taking bullets and protecting the users at home. This was how I justified the complexity of C++, but measured it against the flexibility of the language and the performance of the produced code, and therefore the pleasure of the user. Don’t get me wrong. We’re still going to be using C++ for high-performance, shrink-wrap software for some time to come. Windows and Office XQ (or whatever they’re going to call them) will still be implemented in C++. Client applications that cannot dictate their deployment environment, i.e. can’t dictate the presence of the .NET runtime, will still be implemented in C++ or VB6. Most of the rest is going to be built in .NET without 12-24 months. Stand-alone corporate applications can dictate the presence of the runtime, as can server-side n-tier applications. Web-based applications can take advantage of the compiled and caching performance gains using ASP-style programming, will still enjoying the flexibility and power of ISAPI-style programming via .NET modules and handlers. Everyone in these spaces that works under Windows is going to be moving to .NET, especially the Windows Java programmers who already know the power of such a platform, but want easy access to their DLLs and their COM servers. The reason that people in these environments can now afford to move is that continued research in virtual machine-style environments and increase in machine power has brought about the first platform where ease of use for the programmer does not mean that the user has to suffer. Applications built with .NET are going to be fast enough and when it comes to ASP, they’re going to be much faster than what we’ve had in the past.

The combination of ease of use for the home-by-5 style programmer and the flexibility for the computers-are-my-life style programmer was so great in Java that tens of thousands flooded the Java conferences from the first year. Mix in a user experience that doesn’t have to suffer from the programmers’ choice of  .NET and I finally get it.

Wednesday, 10/17/01

According to legend, the TA office next to the Stanford computer science lab is guarded by a teddy bear. Before a student is allowed to consume valuable time asking a question of the TA, they must first explain it to the teddy bear. Apparently the bear is able to answer 80% of the questions that students ask, saving time for the TAs to play Unreal Tournament.

I often feel like I act as the teddy bear for the COM community. I get several email messages a day from folks that consider the mailings lists (resources set up to answer just these kinds of questions) to be too slow, so they ask me directly. If I don’t know the answer off of the top of my head, I often respond with the following phrase:

    “Can you send me a tiny, tiny project that reproduces the problem? –Chris”

This, of course, implies that I will actually build and debug the project. And 20% of the time, I do. The other 80% of the time, by the time folks have reduced the problem enough to demonstrate it for me, they’ve already solved it, saving me the time (thank goodness).

Knowing that this is the case, I recommend that you become your own teddy bear. A whiteboard is handy for explaining the problem to yourself and Microsoft development tools are now so handy that you can typically whip out a small reproduction project very quickly. These very activities will often solve the problem, but even if they don’t, you’ve got a concise description of the problem and a small repro case to send to your friends or to post to the list.

Made you look!

(if you don’t know what I’m talking about, check here)

In a recent interview with Barbara Walters, Bill Gates was asked how he felt about Ted Turner’s one billion dollar donation to the United Nation. This is what he had to say:

“Certainly, my giving will be in the same league as Ted’s, and beyond. … During my lifetime, you know, the money will be given away.”

He further went on to say:

“I don’t believe in passing on major wealth to (one’s) children, and therefore everything that I’m earning is going toward the causes that I think can help out.”

So far, Bill has given several hundred million dollars to libraries to provide lower income children with access to PCs and the Internet. Do you have an idea for a charity worthy of Bill’s Money? Post your comments here and I’ll keep track of them for Bill. When he’s ready, he’ll know where to come.

P.S. Just so you know, Bill has never once supported anything from this page and as far as I know, he has no idea this page even exists. Don’t get your hopes up.