.NET 2.0
Author
it said "minimum" system requirements on the contests page, one of which was .net 1.1
.net 1.1 has absolutly horible data stuctures, is thier any posible way we can get that uped to 2.0? if we include a redistributable?
You can use .NET 2.0 if and only if it's no longer beta by the time we judge it. We won't install the beta framework on our machines.
So, if you want to gamble on the release date, you can. Just expect to be disqualified if you lose your bet.
So, if you want to gamble on the release date, you can. Just expect to be disqualified if you lose your bet.
Er... Eh?! .NET 1.1 data structures hori..what?! .NET 2.what?!
Not that I'm not aware of .NET 2.0, but how come .NET 1.1 data structures are horrible? Which ones are horrible and what makes them horrible? I've been making use of .NET 1.1 in some of my programs, and it works just fine.
What new improvements/features are there in .NET 2.0?
Not that I'm not aware of .NET 2.0, but how come .NET 1.1 data structures are horrible? Which ones are horrible and what makes them horrible? I've been making use of .NET 1.1 in some of my programs, and it works just fine.
What new improvements/features are there in .NET 2.0?
Quote:Original post by Cibressus
having to box, then unbox things from the list.
This problem is c++ specific. Other Managed languages handle the value type aggregation automatically, so manual boxing/unboxing is not needed.
Quote:Original post by Nik02Quote:Original post by Cibressus
having to box, then unbox things from the list.
This problem is c++ specific. Other Managed languages handle the value type aggregation automatically, so manual boxing/unboxing is not needed.
Automatic, yes but I believe that without generics it's still type-unsafe which is probably what he means. Or perhaps he means the speed hit?
Andrew <--- who's probably wrong...
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
