Recently in Programming Category

I'm feeling a little frustrated right now. Visual Studio 2005 requires such high specs that my old 1.8Ghz Pentium 4 is having problems just clicking along between the various panes. It's click, wait for the focus, click, click, wait for focus, etc, etc.

I don't know why I'm complaining now - I've done quite a bit of work on my personal project already, but it's frustrating because the slowness is finally getting to me.

I'm used to fast fast fast. When I code I type fast, I think fast, and when I compile, I expect instantaneous feedback.

Not sure if it is due to the .NET framework (I installed 3.0 sometime back). I intentionally upgraded my memory sometime back to, are you ready for this, 1.25GB of memory, specifically to support my development work! Wow! 1.25GB! And still VS is unsatisfied!

Oh, alright, the memory isn't as high as I would have liked, but hey, it was 512MB before.

Hark back to the old days when I made do with GCC.

Now with Visual Studio 2008 on the horizon, with full support for the .NET 3.0 technologies, I'm convinced my machine as it stands right now is more likely to make my morning coffee than to be able to even load VS2008.

I'm sorely tempted to just sink in 2K bucks and build myself a screamer of a PC, so I can code in relatively stress-free environment. But no. I will make my next project pay for itself, and pay for the new machine that I'm most definitely going to buy.

But that 19" LG widescreen monitor is looking very appealing right now. The luscious screen is showing a disembodied finger making a come-hither motion, beckoning me forward, beckoning me to flash my wallet, and I have a feeling I may not be able to withstand the lure for very long...

I just did this test, which is quite funny (not quite hilarious, not quite dull).

Your programmer personality type is:

DLSB

You're a Doer.
You are very quick at getting tasks done. You believe the outcome is the most important part of a task and the faster you can reach that outcome the better. After all, time is money.

You like coding at a Low level.
You're from the old school of programming and believe that you should have an intimate relationship with the computer. You don't mind juggling registers around and spending hours getting a 5% performance increase in an algorithm.

You work best in a Solo situation.
The best way to program is by yourself. There's no communication problems, you know every part of the code allowing you to write the best programs possible.

You are a liBeral programmer.
Programming is a complex task and you should use white space and comments as freely as possible to help simplify the task. We're not writing on paper anymore so we can take up as much room as we need.

You can try it yourself here.

I was about to hit the sack when I came across this article: Mono brings Visual Basic programs to Linux. Although it doesn't explicitly say which version of VB, it does seem to cover only the .NET version of VB (considering what Mono does, this is very logical).

I mean, when you say VB, there are after all two 'versions' , if you will, of VB, and that's VB6 and VB.NET. Both of these languages, despite their similarities in name, are so different from each other that only the colossally stubborn would insist that they resemble anything like each other. The article could do better in being more explicit.

Anyway, [stiffles yawn], so now I can write VB.NET applications running on Mono. Is it a good idea? It simply means if I've existing skills in VB.NET, I could leverage that on a platform I don't understand. However, since you're coding in VB, it's a high probability that you're going to go through a learning curve getting around in the Linux environment anyway. If you're going to learn, why not learn a new language and code for Linux the 'proper' way? At the very least take this opportunity to use Mono to learn up C#, if you haven't already in the Windows world!

I'm oh so pissed.

I waited damn long for the SQL Server Compact Edition to come out of beta so that I can use it in my application. We're talking bated breath here, the daily website status check.

I just found that it cannot support byte datatype length beyond 510 bytes! This sucks, of course, as I can't use it to store the images the application that I'm currently writing depends on!

And I spent hours today porting the database from Access to SQLCE, only to hit this problem.

I'm more than a little angry - time is money, and as it is time is already a premium. This is counterproductive, and I wished this sort of crap wouldn't always happen when I'm in crunch mode.

I'm not unfamiliar with this sort of tech curve balls, but it'd be nice once in a while to just work with new technology that 'just works'.

If this was for work, I'd be less angry, but this is for my personal project, which is already behind schedule as it is (and getting later as I write this rant).

I don't know why I put this under Programming, but hey, I'm adding a link to Technorati in a vain attempt to improve my visibility. I'm trying to tell everyone:

I'M OPINIONATED, AND I WANT YOU TO KNOW!

Of course, those who really make the trek here will find that not only am I not really *that* opinionated. But at least I sound authoritative while trying to be opinionated.

Okay, here goes: Technorati Profile.

Let the spiders cometh.

Hmm... I suddenly realized that my focus these days is development. Interesting.

I'm wondering if there is an easier way for a .NET application to natively support different databases in the same code base. For instance, when I do SQL Server, the .NET Data Provider I would use is SqlConnection. If it is OLEDB, then it's the OleDbConnection namespace.

Now each of these namespaces have their own DataReader object, which is the primary data object I use. How can I write the application such that I can automatically choose which one to use (based on a parameter), without coding different sections for each data provider?

MSDN, here I come!

Okay, it's good to know that Microsoft has committed to VB6 support in Vista. It's a good thing... Microsoft simply wants old VB6 programs to run out their lifespan so that companies can start to develop in .NET.

Architecturally, VB.NET and VB6 are so different that they really are separate products, rather than a natural progression from old version of a language to the next version.

There has been talk in the VB community (don't ask me for sources - I can't remember where I read about that. Plus I'm writing about it so it must be true) that Microsoft should have spun off the VB6 developmental tree so that it will still be developed, or at least sell the VB6 technology to another company who will continue to develop it.

But alas, this is not the be, the juggernaut that is Microsoft is trudging along with .NET with the VB6 community dragged kicking and screaming behind it.

Not necessarily a bad thing, but a poster example of our line of work - evolve or die.

SQL Server 2005 Express is free, but it isn't small. Some would argue that 35MB *is* small, but I'd clout them behind their heads and clip their ears. That size is the worst size - it's not *that* huge to make the power downloader cry, but it isn't small enough for casual downloaders. Plus fitting that on a CD is just a waste of CD space - especially if the application that you're shipping with it is only 4MB.

But really, the real problem I have with it is it's inability to import and export data. That seriously limits the work I want to do with SS2005E.

Yeah, I can think of ways to work around it, but why the hassle for something that's supposed to be easy in the first place?

Not giving up on it first, though... lemme play with it a little more. Firebird has to wait a little longer - let's face it, SQL Server learning curve = almost non-existent. Firebird learning curve - a mile-long trudge up a small hill.

Sigh, I've also got to work on making catchier blog entry titles.

I've always been faced with a dilemma when evaluating databases for new projects. In otak, I had no issues using Access as I wanted to write up something quickly, and it worked. However I've at the back of my mind kept in mind that Access isn't exactly a fantastic database to use when otak grows up. Also, it isn't ideal to keep using Access because:
1. It's fading, and fading fast. Microsoft is preferring MS SQL Express instead.
2. Built in support for Jet is also going away, so one cannot take for granted every machine has Jet support there. This of course takes away Access's initial attraction in the first place - to enable the developer to whip up an application with Access with minimal installation dependency worries.
3. Since we're going to need to bundle drivers for Access, we might as well look at other more powerful databases out there.

My journey to find an Access replacement was fraught with many challenges. The first was how the heck to get started in the first place? I knew I wanted a database that is self-contained in a file. I know I wanted it to be free, open source, or whatever, as long as it doesn't restrict my using it in any applications I choose to write, whether it is freeware or commercial. I don't need a bigass relational database with boatload of features I don't use, and I sure as heck don't want users to have to install it first (ala SQL Server). And most importantly, that I can use it in .NET/Java. More for .NET, really.

It took me damn long to find out that the proper term for the database with these requirements is embedded database. It doesn't help that Access isn't exactly an embedded database, it simply could be used as one.

I've been evaluating databases for a while now for my personal projects (on and off I must admit), but as I force myself to transition to .NET. I know that I want to start with small projects that have minimal database requirement, for which requiring my users to install SQL Server or even MySQL would be an overkill.

So I'm happy to report that I have found a seemingly perfect solution to my problem: using Firebird as an embedded database. It can be used for .NET, so I'm happy.

I'll have to play with it awhile first, before I fully give it my endorsement. But from the specs it looks just like what the doctor ordered.

Btw, if ever there was a requirement to use a full fledged database, I'd actually go with SQL Server, or MySQL. I think it makes good business sense to support SQL Server, as many enterprises would have that installed already, and forcing them to use MySQL would not be very attractive.

However, for users who are on a budget, having the option to allow them to use MySQL is perfect.

Anyway, I digress. The application I have in mind will be commercial (but it'll be cheap), and a quick project. So that's why Firebird will come in handy.

Did I forget to mention that Simtel and Winsite are only 2 of the download sites that I know are distributing otak? There are other places I know that actually offer the downloads as well.

Some are linked to the Simtel network, although hosted elsewhere (i.e Chicago Sun Times) and I'm not sure if the counter gets incremented when downloaded from sites like these.

Then there are other sites that hosts otak on their own. I remember stumbling on them before, but not sure if they are actually still around.

I'm pretty sure there are places I don't even know hosting the file.

After all this rubbish, my point is - there could be well over 4000 downloads of otak.

:D

As you can see, I'm trying my hardest to be modest.

I don't know why, but I just did a check on the total number of downloads for otak thus far, since it was released close to 2 years ago.

Winsite has about 700, and Simtel has recorded about 3300, so the grand total is about 4000 downloads.

I recognize that if it wasn't freeware, there wouldn't be this many downloads. And I can't honestly say I'm not tempted to turn this into shareware.

I suppose I'm torn - fulfilling a 'payment' of sorts for my dependence on freeware in my own computing universe, or making a little money for myself.

On one hand, I'm contributing a software to the world, something that is used all around the world. On the other, it is my blood sweat and tears.

Hmm... I will explore this further later.