Microsoft research has a CLI implementation with generics support… At several conferences we have in public avered that generics will be added to some next version of.NET. With those two pieces of data, I nonplus the question – how wide spread should generics be utilized? Was ATL goodness, or something removed a bit too far?

For those of you unfamiliar with generics, they are essentially C++ templates implemented at the runtime level. I’m not a compiler wonk, so I have to collocate with my most canonical understanding – fundamentally the CLR would do dynamical class generation at runtime, thuse keeping code bloat, but contributing you the performance benefit of powerfully typewritten classes. In addition, since the runtime keeps the identity of the class being a generic, features like reflection really process right.

Related Posts:
App.config Examples
Updated ASP.NET Active Data Bits Placed
Legitimate Algorithms

Begining to shoot some ASP.NET code into my site… I sure enough care that Radio had a mode that judged it’s script on the server with ASP.NET – i’500 love to be able to impart some more dynamical content to the server.

The first content – my list of movies.

Related Posts:
Selecting A Veridical Estate Professional Is Of import When Purchasing Or Trading A Home
Which Side of the Foresightful Tail Should You Initiate On?
What Good Will A Market Stability Regulator Do?

After learning this on ValleyWag :

“YouTube, he said NewTeeVee, is merely proceeding to realize revenues of about $70 million to $90 million in 2008. InVideo ads – the kind Sanchez took Google rived off – will be an even littler part of the pie.”

I know this isn’t apples to apples. These are 1999 dollars, broadband penetration was dramatically downcast back so and we weren’t an advertising held mode, but and then once more, we didn’t give to subsidise the bandwidth of every non commercial-grade video on the internet and do everything we perchance could to fend off copyright law.

I simply can’t help but put up a link to my original article and a Broadcast.com quarterly release. If alone we had today’s bandwidth costs backward and so…

broadcast.com Reports Record Second Quarter Revenue Revenue Increased 130% From Same Period in 1998 – Company Fiscal Information

July 12, 1999

Broadcast.com (Nasdaq: BCST) Wednesday covered revenue adding up $13.5 million for the second quarter terminated June 30, 1999, an increase of 130% over $5.9 million in the same period in 1998, and a 31% increase over the first quarter of 1999. Net loss for the second quarter of 1999 was $1.9 million, or $0.05 per introductory and thined share. This compares with a final loss of $3.5 million, or $0.11 per introductory and cut share during the second quarter of 1998.

Broadcast.com staked firm revenue growth, with revenue from Business Services increasing to $9.5 million for the second quarter of 1999, a 138% increase over the same period of 1998 and an increase of 34% over the first quarter of 1999. Business Services revenue interpreted 71% of the full revenue covered. Promoting revenue increased to $4.0 million for the quarter terminated June 30, 1999, an increase of 114% over the same period of 1998 and an increase of 25% over the first quarter of 1999.

Read the rest of this entry »

Brian Carter of Fuel Interactive brings up an interesting point about the effectiveness of keywords in the longsighted tail of pay per click advertising. It has long (in Internet time) been intended that advertising on a immense portfolio of search terms will yield best returns because you’ll pay off a trickle of traffic from thousands and thousands of terms at low-toned cost per click AND the traffic will convert at a higher rate for a duple gain in returns.

Even so, Carter excuses that this isn’t of necessity the case:

The Problem with Prospicient Tail Keywords

But the marked-up slight secret of PPC is that 95% of your conversions come from 5% of your keywords.

In truth.

The others keywords either

* Don’t do (100 clicks and no conversions), or
* The clicks roll in so slow that you won”t have the statistical confidence to delete them until the year 2112 (yay, Rush!).

As I said, interesting points.

While 95% of conversions may come from a small sub-set of a keyword portfolio, that doesn’t necessarily mean that the rest of the portfolio is underperforming. The rest of the terms may not drive home as many conversions, but that’s not truly a measure of performance. Return on investment would be a best measure.

But more significantly, I conceive the self-aggrandisingest concept that could be misconceived hither is what I’ll telephone “micro-poor-tails.” By that, I think terms that fix relatively few searches, but are stock-still distinctly poor-tail terms when looked at on a page by page basis. For example a retail site could have thousands of products in inventory – some of which are relatively vague. On a page by page basis, it’s pretty clean-cut that product-names and product-IDs would be counted inadequate-tail terms while on a site-all-encompassing basis they would appear more like foresightful-tail terms.

Read the rest of this entry »

You’ll believably have a few additional minutes on your hands while waiting for VS Express to download. Do yourself another favor and check out out the bursting changes in.NET Framework 2.0 [BradA ]. The list is pretty minuscule, weighing the breadth of the framework, but you’ll in all probability ascertain a favorite in in that respect.

Jason : I’m ne’er a immense fan of string free-based designs, in the first place because of their lack of compile time validation, etc… however, lets flirt with changing your “Personality” pattern to figure out in.NET…

If you drew the data type of “Personality” be a System.Type object, and then you could do a fairish assignment:

machine.Personality = typeof(ScanSideways);

This stages a could of interesting problems. For the first time, you have a compile time dependancy on the ScanSideways class. Easy fixable by a tenuous change:

machine.Personality = Type.GetType(”ScanSideways”);

Which you can at present parameterize, load from a file, whatever. Thusly far, this is cake. My problem is that we have lots all the type checking. At some point the program will accept the type object (still the powerfully typecast version) and do an Activator.CreateInstance telephone followed by a cast to the right data type. Boom.

In person, I bid there was a way of pining down the constraints of a picky type, some form of validation rules that could be put on (hey, hold back! you named that earliest in your post <G>). For example I could tell:

public class Machine {
    [BaseType(typeof(Personality))]
    Type Personality { catch; set up; }
}

Read the rest of this entry »

Darren Stokes sides with Joel over Jeff on whether programmers should cognize C.

This hale debate cues me of unpaid radio operators brabbling over whether newbies should be permited to fix a license without geting a line Morse code.

Morse Code

So Eric, assure us about your experience as an amateur “ham” radio operator?

My call sign is KA9KEF.  To pay off my Cosmopolitan class license, I had to go a published exam as easily as a Morse code test at 13 words per minute.

Real, you cognise Morse code?  Today, it’s potential to pay back a ham radio license with no code at all. 

Yes, and I remember that’s hideous!  It’s just incorrect.

Why do you recollect that?

If I had to hear Morse code, so everybody else should as well.

So does anybody rattling take Morse code these days?

Well, I say not.  But don’t bug me with facts that distract from my point.  Hearing Morse code should be a rite of passage for all hams.  Anybody who paid off a license without code is not a “existent ham”.

But you — you are a “existent ham”.

Yep.  I went the Morse code test.  13 wpm.

So you’re nonetheless actively involved in recreational radio?

Well, no more.

Oh.  When was the last time you applyed your ham rig?

I say it’s been a few years.

How many years are in “a few”?  Possibly five?

Read the rest of this entry »

We hardly put up some updated bits and samples for ASP.NET Active Data… I advance you to plump foot them up and allow us experience what you intend…

Some coolheaded newfangled stuff in this release:

1. Ocular Studio Integration is much uncontaminating
2. Right away sustains "pretty" URLs
   http://products/details/1 rather of http://products/details.aspx?id=123
3. Full documentation
4. Extra support for 3rd party control vendors and O/R Mappers (more details making out before long)

Scott Hunter of late did a HanselMinutes podcast that you should discipline out..

ScottGu did a post of late that arrives at the high-pitched points of Active Data… 

Hold them a try, we’five hundred love to have your feedback!

http://code.msdn.microsoft.com/dynamicdata

Relating Posts:
Additive Legitimate Algorithms
Rule your Sql Server Version and Edition
Why The Existent Estate Market May Swing about Next Year

Well, evidently you aren’t let to have an opinion on the web any longer. I obtained flamed by an author after carrying a personal review of his book. It wasn”t an objective review, I didn’t mark it as such, but I wasted a good deal of my life between reading the book and then turn that around with the extra hour I spent writing the review so I figured I’d put my real thoughts in there. Anyways, appears the author had some comments.

Pretend what? Authors want to memorise that not everyone can spell a book. I don”t care how technically able you are, how smart, or how much of an industry professional. I don”t care if you’ve been writing X for Y years where Y > Z and Z is my age… Just because you’ve been working on technology since before I was born doesn’t mean you have the ability to produce a book that is able to capture a wide audience and instruct them in a given area. I’ll flip some points to indorse this up.

Microsoft Windows is a great piece of software and some dementedly gifted developers saved the OS. But infer who indited the documentation? For sure as hell wasn”t the people that wrote the OS. What about the CLR? Top-notch bright people coming top-notch bright things over in that location. But how many of them dare publish a book about it? Adam Nathan did a groovy job, but I guess he occupyed more than a year droping a line his. What about Brad Abarams and the glossed CLR? Well, that isn’t a book of explanation but rather a book of comments that was very tactfully blue-penciled. The people that real write about the CLR are the tech writers that brought forth the oh thus kvetched approximately.NET Framework SDK Documentation. If you recollect it’s high-risk at present, you wouldn’t desire to cognise what it would take care like if there wasn’t a commited team of expert writers with English degrees working on it.

Read the rest of this entry »

I had skiped this article would be on changes to the next version of the CLR which let it to be hosted inside SQL Server and other “ambitious” environments.  This is more by and large interesting than you might cogitate, because it makes an opportunity for other processes (i.e. your processes) to host the CLR with a like level of integration and control.  This lets in control over memory usage, synchronization, meandering (including fibers), led security models, assembly storage, and more.

Nevertheless, that topic is of necessity related to our next release, and I cannot discuss abstruse details of that next release until those details have been publically divulged.  In former October, Microsoft is concuring its PDC and I require us to reveal many details at that time.  In fact, I’m blessed up to be a member of a PDC panel on this topic.  If you work at a database or an application server or a likewise perplexed product that might benefit from hosting the CLR, you may require to go to.

Read the rest of this entry »