The use of Attributes.

[Mark Broadbent]

This might sound like a bit of a stupid statement (no change there then!) to
some of the gurus, but am I the only one left a bit flustered by what
appears to be around ten zillion attributes (and values) and their uses that
can be applied to code (e.g. when to use when not to use). Im sure with the
passing of time I'll remember an ever larger amount, its just that at the
moment their seems to be an incredibly large amount.

Am I misguided or does anyone else feel the same way?

p.s.
I do see their benefit for reducing code, its just that to do so can only be
done if their existance is known or remembered by me
--


Br,
Mark Broadbent
mcdba , mcse+i
=============

 

[clintonG]

Ha. Get ready for ASP.NET 2.0 which is alleged to have
even more classes -- hundreds more -- and upwards of
20,000 more methods. Who knows how many member
in all?

This is for the most part all due to -- RAD -- the trend to create
push button code generators that can be operated by low paid
monkeys, i.e. business analysts with no training in software
development but whom are alleged to have deep subject matter
knowledge.

This is going to affect VB developers in a big way and it has been
amazing to watch the expressions of glee on their faces as they
sit in a presentation hearing how future releases such as ASP.NET 2.0
will in many cases only require writing the proverbial 2-3 lines of code.

What these VB dummies fail to understand is that they are cheering
for an architectural model that will lower their wages and in many
cases eliminate their jobs.

Granted, monkey coding will eventually come to C# and some claim
it is already here being called Visual Studio ;-) but that's at least
another major release from now. Right???


--
<%= Clinton Gallagher
A/E/C Consulting, Web Design, e-Commerce Software Development
Wauwatosa, Milwaukee County, Wisconsin USA
NET csgallagher@ REMOVETHISTEXT metromilwaukee.com
URL http://www.metromilwaukee.com/clintongallagher/

 

[Paul E Collins]

Ha. Get ready for ASP.NET 2.0 which is alleged to have
even more classes -- hundreds more -- and upwards of
20,000 more methods. Who knows how many member
in all?
This is for the most part all due to -- RAD -- the trend to create
push button code generators that can be operated by low paid
monkeys, i.e. business analysts with no training [...]

OP was discussing attributes specifically, not just classes. As with
any set of standard libraries, you aren't usually expected to know
everything that is available, but the more you know, the more you can
exploit and reuse.

Regarding your post - I suppose I'm more of an academic than a
business coder, but I don't see how the ability to do increasingly
clever things in a few lines of code is going to affect employment as
you describe. More complex building-blocks make it possible to build
more complex systems; they still don't build themselves, though.

P.

 

[Mark Broadbent]

thx for comments clinton and paul.


Paul, I agree that the more you know the more you can use etc....
My (slight) fustration is really down to the fact that there are several
(read many) that are necessary and many that are sort of necessary. An
example of the former would be (using web services) the WebMethod attribute.
An example of the semi necessary attributes could be the Transactional ones.
Therefore they cant really be avoided.

I think if I found a resource where every single one was listed together Id
be happier, but they are probably only found in each of their respective
namespaces definitions ...which means that you need to kind of know of there
existance in the first place

--


Br,
Mark Broadbent
mcdba , mcse+i
=============

Ha. Get ready for ASP.NET 2.0 which is alleged to have
even more classes -- hundreds more -- and upwards of
20,000 more methods. Who knows how many member
in all?
This is for the most part all due to -- RAD -- the trend to create
push button code generators that can be operated by low paid
monkeys, i.e. business analysts with no training [...]

OP was discussing attributes specifically, not just classes. As with
any set of standard libraries, you aren't usually expected to know
everything that is available, but the more you know, the more you can
exploit and reuse.

Regarding your post - I suppose I'm more of an academic than a
business coder, but I don't see how the ability to do increasingly
clever things in a few lines of code is going to affect employment as
you describe. More complex building-blocks make it possible to build
more complex systems; they still don't build themselves, though.

P.

 

[clintonG]

The insight regarding the devaluation of VB developers is one
derived from historical precedence. We don't have to go
very far into the past to recall a valid comparative analysis.

When web development began the only way to do web development
was code a statement at a time using an editor. Persons with those
skills were in demand and were paid very well. I know this because
one of them was me.

It didn't take but a year or two and push button code generators
started showing up. Vermeer ring a bell?

The presence of push button code generators pushed the prevaling
wage rate down with each successive release of that category of
application.

The real world is overpopulated with parasites looking for something
for nothing. For example, if you use a thesaurus to look up the word
'parasite' you will find that word synonymous with 'management.'

I believe when the word gets around that it is possible to 'develop'
software using VB and '2-3 lines of code' those that 'manage' will
devalue VB developers the same way they devalued those who knew
how to build web pages manually regardless of the other mitigating
circumstances.


--
<%= Clinton Gallagher
A/E/C Consulting, Web Design, e-Commerce Software Development
Wauwatosa, Milwaukee County, Wisconsin USA
NET csgallagher@ REMOVETHISTEXT metromilwaukee.com
URL http://www.metromilwaukee.com/clintongallagher/

thx for comments clinton and paul.


Paul, I agree that the more you know the more you can use etc....
My (slight) fustration is really down to the fact that there are several
(read many) that are necessary and many that are sort of necessary. An
example of the former would be (using web services) the WebMethod attribute.
An example of the semi necessary attributes could be the Transactional ones.
Therefore they cant really be avoided.

I think if I found a resource where every single one was listed together Id
be happier, but they are probably only found in each of their respective
namespaces definitions ...which means that you need to kind of know of there
existance in the first place

--


Br,
Mark Broadbent
mcdba , mcse+i
=============

Ha. Get ready for ASP.NET 2.0 which is alleged to have
even more classes -- hundreds more -- and upwards of
20,000 more methods. Who knows how many member
in all?
This is for the most part all due to -- RAD -- the trend to create
push button code generators that can be operated by low paid
monkeys, i.e. business analysts with no training [...]

OP was discussing attributes specifically, not just classes. As with
any set of standard libraries, you aren't usually expected to know
everything that is available, but the more you know, the more you can
exploit and reuse.

Regarding your post - I suppose I'm more of an academic than a
business coder, but I don't see how the ability to do increasingly
clever things in a few lines of code is going to affect employment as
you describe. More complex building-blocks make it possible to build
more complex systems; they still don't build themselves, though.

P.

 

[Mark Broadbent]

Whilst I do share your concerns (I really do) and have more of my own
regarding outsourcing to indo-china, but I am still no closer to my magic
"all available attributes are listed here" but I guess that is probably cos
they cant be found in one place.

Just as a side note to your concerns, I think the people who produce these
code generators would argue that it allows for quicker development so that
more time can be spent on more complicated designs and intricacys. Not quite
sure I believe that one either. But nethertheless I still dont think that
languages such as C# are really going to fall foul of this scenario (at
least in the near/ immediate future), there are just too many complexities.
I use C++ as an example which is still going strong today and probably will
for at least another 5 years.

But hey, what the hell do I know!



--


Br,
Mark Broadbent
mcdba , mcse+i
=============

The insight regarding the devaluation of VB developers is one
derived from historical precedence. We don't have to go
very far into the past to recall a valid comparative analysis.

When web development began the only way to do web development
was code a statement at a time using an editor. Persons with those
skills were in demand and were paid very well. I know this because
one of them was me.

It didn't take but a year or two and push button code generators
started showing up. Vermeer ring a bell?

The presence of push button code generators pushed the prevaling
wage rate down with each successive release of that category of
application.

The real world is overpopulated with parasites looking for something
for nothing. For example, if you use a thesaurus to look up the word
'parasite' you will find that word synonymous with 'management.'

I believe when the word gets around that it is possible to 'develop'
software using VB and '2-3 lines of code' those that 'manage' will
devalue VB developers the same way they devalued those who knew
how to build web pages manually regardless of the other mitigating
circumstances.


--
<%= Clinton Gallagher
A/E/C Consulting, Web Design, e-Commerce Software Development
Wauwatosa, Milwaukee County, Wisconsin USA
NET csgallagher@ REMOVETHISTEXT metromilwaukee.com
URL http://www.metromilwaukee.com/clintongallagher/

thx for comments clinton and paul.


Paul, I agree that the more you know the more you can use etc....
My (slight) fustration is really down to the fact that there are several
(read many) that are necessary and many that are sort of necessary. An
example of the former would be (using web services) the WebMethod attribute.
An example of the semi necessary attributes could be the Transactional ones.
Therefore they cant really be avoided.

I think if I found a resource where every single one was listed together Id
be happier, but they are probably only found in each of their respective
namespaces definitions ...which means that you need to kind of know of there
existance in the first place

--


Br,
Mark Broadbent
mcdba , mcse+i
=============

Ha. Get ready for ASP.NET 2.0 which is alleged to have
even more classes -- hundreds more -- and upwards of
20,000 more methods. Who knows how many member
in all?
This is for the most part all due to -- RAD -- the trend to create
push button code generators that can be operated by low paid
monkeys, i.e. business analysts with no training [...]

OP was discussing attributes specifically, not just classes. As with
any set of standard libraries, you aren't usually expected to know
everything that is available, but the more you know, the more you can
exploit and reuse.

Regarding your post - I suppose I'm more of an academic than a
business coder, but I don't see how the ability to do increasingly
clever things in a few lines of code is going to affect employment as
you describe. More complex building-blocks make it possible to build
more complex systems; they still don't build themselves, though.

P.

 

[clintonG]

Google: "attributes"+"C#"

I think this O'Reilly article [1] helps put your concerns into a context
that has helped me understand what attributes are, who can create them
and as you expresses, 'why there are so damn many of them.'

--
<%= Clinton Gallagher
A/E/C Consulting, Web Design, e-Commerce Software Development
Wauwatosa, Milwaukee County, Wisconsin USA
NET csgallagher@ REMOVETHISTEXT metromilwaukee.com
URL http://www.metromilwaukee.com/clintongallagher/

[1] http://www.ondotnet.com/pub/a/dotnet/excerpt/prog_csharp_ch18/

Whilst I do share your concerns (I really do) and have more of my own
regarding outsourcing to indo-china, but I am still no closer to my magic
"all available attributes are listed here" but I guess that is probably cos
they cant be found in one place.

Just as a side note to your concerns, I think the people who produce these
code generators would argue that it allows for quicker development so that
more time can be spent on more complicated designs and intricacys. Not quite
sure I believe that one either. But nethertheless I still dont think that
languages such as C# are really going to fall foul of this scenario (at
least in the near/ immediate future), there are just too many complexities.
I use C++ as an example which is still going strong today and probably will
for at least another 5 years.

But hey, what the hell do I know!



--


Br,
Mark Broadbent
mcdba , mcse+i
=============

The insight regarding the devaluation of VB developers is one
derived from historical precedence. We don't have to go
very far into the past to recall a valid comparative analysis.

When web development began the only way to do web development
was code a statement at a time using an editor. Persons with those
skills were in demand and were paid very well. I know this because
one of them was me.

It didn't take but a year or two and push button code generators
started showing up. Vermeer ring a bell?

The presence of push button code generators pushed the prevaling
wage rate down with each successive release of that category of
application.

The real world is overpopulated with parasites looking for something
for nothing. For example, if you use a thesaurus to look up the word
'parasite' you will find that word synonymous with 'management.'

I believe when the word gets around that it is possible to 'develop'
software using VB and '2-3 lines of code' those that 'manage' will
devalue VB developers the same way they devalued those who knew
how to build web pages manually regardless of the other mitigating
circumstances.


--
<%= Clinton Gallagher
A/E/C Consulting, Web Design, e-Commerce Software Development
Wauwatosa, Milwaukee County, Wisconsin USA
NET csgallagher@ REMOVETHISTEXT metromilwaukee.com
URL http://www.metromilwaukee.com/clintongallagher/

thx for comments clinton and paul.


Paul, I agree that the more you know the more you can use etc....
My (slight) fustration is really down to the fact that there are several
(read many) that are necessary and many that are sort of necessary. An
example of the former would be (using web services) the WebMethod attribute.
An example of the semi necessary attributes could be the Transactional ones.
Therefore they cant really be avoided.

I think if I found a resource where every single one was listed together Id
be happier, but they are probably only found in each of their respective
namespaces definitions ...which means that you need to kind of know of there
existance in the first place

--


Br,
Mark Broadbent
mcdba , mcse+i
=============

Ha. Get ready for ASP.NET 2.0 which is alleged to have
even more classes -- hundreds more -- and upwards of
20,000 more methods. Who knows how many member
in all?
This is for the most part all due to -- RAD -- the trend to create
push button code generators that can be operated by low paid
monkeys, i.e. business analysts with no training [...]

OP was discussing attributes specifically, not just classes. As with
any set of standard libraries, you aren't usually expected to know
everything that is available, but the more you know, the more you can
exploit and reuse.

Regarding your post - I suppose I'm more of an academic than a
business coder, but I don't see how the ability to do increasingly
clever things in a few lines of code is going to affect employment as
you describe. More complex building-blocks make it possible to build
more complex systems; they still don't build themselves, though.

P.