Velocity Reviews

Velocity Reviews (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/index.php)
-   MCSD (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/f26-mcsd.html)
-   -   version (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/t44314-version.html)

sender 06-14-2004 01:54 PM

version
 
what is the present version of vs.net

The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere 06-14-2004 04:36 PM

Re: version
 
>what is the present version of vs.net

48

Kline Sphere (Chalk) MCNGP #3

Eric 06-14-2004 05:07 PM

Re: version
 
sender wrote:

> what is the present version of vs.net


2003, or 1.1

UAError 06-14-2004 07:53 PM

Re: version
 
"Eric" <Eric> wrote:

>sender wrote:
>
>> what is the present version of vs.net

>
>2003, or 1.1


I think you mean Visual Studio .NET 2003;
aka Visual Studio .NET 7.1 (which includes the .NET
Framework/SDK 1.1)

as opposed to

Visual Studio .NET 2002;
aka Visual Studio .NET 7 (which includes the .NET
Framework/SDK 1.0)

or

Visual Studio .NET 2005;
aka Visual Studio .NET 7.2(? or 8) (which includes the .NET
Framework/SDK 2.0)

You have just demonstrated why they switched to
release labels representing an AD year. Basically the same
tactic as creating version control labels - nobody is going
to remember all the separate component version numbers; they
only become relevant if you want to determine if anything
for a particular component has changed for a release. (Also
the lack of major/minor version gives no hint about the
"significance" (or lack of) of the release.)

The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere 06-14-2004 09:42 PM

Re: version
 
Nah, It's 48 trust me.

On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 15:53:00 -0400, UAError <null@null.null> wrote:

>"Eric" <Eric> wrote:
>
>>sender wrote:
>>
>>> what is the present version of vs.net

>>
>>2003, or 1.1

>
>I think you mean Visual Studio .NET 2003;
>aka Visual Studio .NET 7.1 (which includes the .NET
>Framework/SDK 1.1)
>
>as opposed to
>
>Visual Studio .NET 2002;
>aka Visual Studio .NET 7 (which includes the .NET
>Framework/SDK 1.0)
>
>or
>
>Visual Studio .NET 2005;
>aka Visual Studio .NET 7.2(? or 8) (which includes the .NET
>Framework/SDK 2.0)
>
> You have just demonstrated why they switched to
>release labels representing an AD year. Basically the same
>tactic as creating version control labels - nobody is going
>to remember all the separate component version numbers; they
>only become relevant if you want to determine if anything
>for a particular component has changed for a release. (Also
>the lack of major/minor version gives no hint about the
>"significance" (or lack of) of the release.)



Kline Sphere (Chalk) MCNGP #3

UAError 06-15-2004 02:09 PM

Re: version
 
The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere <.> wrote:

>Nah, It's 48 trust me.
>

Why?
Because 48 is halfway between 42 and six times nine?

The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere 06-15-2004 03:50 PM

Re: version
 
>Why?
>Because 48 is halfway between 42 and six times nine?


No, because 48 is 50 - 2.... dear, oh dear......

Kline Sphere (Chalk) MCNGP #3

Eric 06-16-2004 02:42 PM

Re: version
 
The Poster Formerly Known as Kline Sphere wrote:

> > Why?
> > Because 48 is halfway between 42 and six times nine?

>
> No, because 48 is 50 - 2.... dear, oh dear......
>
> Kline Sphere (Chalk) MCNGP #3


This just goes to show that high school counselors are right: you do
have to be good in math to be a programmer!

Eric


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:59 AM.

Powered by vBulletin®. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.