New SKUs and a Release Date for Visual Studio 2010

[gep13]

Yip, have to admit his blog is on my RSS feed

Lot's of useful information on there.

[Cander]

Something only a programmer could find funny. The new dynamic type is a static type.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/libr...6(VS.100).aspx

[RobDog888]

They just created a type that is Late Bound that wont break Option Strict.

[chris128]

Yeah thats what I was thinking lol I guess its better than turning Option Strict off altogether

[RobDog888]

Maybe it would have been better to have some sort of casting that would do the same thing.
Just seems to me that Dynamic is a repackaged Variant

Option Strict should never be an option to turn off. There is always a way to do something.

[Cander]

Just seems to me that Dynamic is a repackaged Variant

Not really. var infers a Strong Type. dynamic maintains itself as a dynamic type and is more useful for invoking functions from dynamic languages such as JavaScript or IronPython

[chris128]

You mean people actually use IronPython?

[Cander]

You mean people actually use IronPython?

Apparently.

[RobDog888]

Not really. var infers a Strong Type. dynamic maintains itself as a dynamic type and is more useful for invoking functions from dynamic languages such as JavaScript or IronPython

Yes and no. Dynamic is more useful but its losely typed same as Variant. Its up to the programmer to make sure the object that will be casting will be of the expected type. Dynamic can bypass the Option Strict checking whereas Variant would require a casting to some defined type.

[Cander]

Yes and no. Dynamic is more useful but its losely typed same as Variant. Its up to the programmer to make sure the object that will be casting will be of the expected type. Dynamic can bypass the Option Strict checking whereas Variant would require a casting to some defined type.

Are we talking 2 different vars here? I am referring to var in C# where var is implicitly inferred to it's strong type. Whereas VB 6's var is what it sounds you are referring to.

[RobDog888]

repackaged Variant = VB6 Variant

[gep13]

Apparently.

Off Topic:

Have you used it Cander? Any good? I have read about it, but never actually done anything with it?

Gary

[Cander]

repackaged Variant = VB6 Variant

Ok. Epic faceplam!

[Cander]

Off Topic:

Have you used it Cander? Any good? I have read about it, but never actually done anything with it?

Gary

Never had the call to try it. A friend of mine loves it, but he is one those dynamic language lovers who would sing it's praises no matter what.

I do kinda like the python syntax though.

[JuggaloBrotha]

Hmm... so the variant type is back, what a surprise. Wasn't Object supposed to be the type that handles what Variant did back in vb6 and older?

Why is .Net becoming so loosely typed anyways? I mean Linq, now Variant... this is becoming sad.

[Cander]

Hmm... so the variant type is back, what a surprise. Wasn't Object supposed to be the type that handles what Variant did back in vb6 and older?

Why is .Net becoming so loosely typed anyways? I mean Linq, now Variant... this is becoming sad.

LINQ isn't loosely typed. And as I said above dynamic is useful for invoking of dynamic language methods. It will simplify Reflection for those languages and COM Interop. dynamic tells the compiler not to resolve the object until runtime. This allows you to use a dynamic variable in a stronly typed way like accessing fields and methods with dot notation without the compiler bombing out when you try to compile your code. So you could tie a dynamic variable to a dynamic object and call a method from it like

myDynamic.Method();

If myDynamic was declared as Object it would not compile.

[chris128]

To get back on topic - I just received an email from MS suggesting that this fix might improve the startup speed of the WPF/Silverlight designer in VS 2010 BETA 2
http://blogs.msdn.com/ddperf/archive...10-beta-2.aspx

I havent had chance to test it yet as I rebuilt my PC with Windows 7 recently and havent reinstalled the BETA yet..