"Metre Meter" <> wrote in message
news:3513cc69-bcec-4637-8011-...
On Jan 10, 5:37 pm, "Scott M." <s-...@nospam.nospam> wrote:
> Yes, JScript and JScript.NET are very different and the term that you use
> is
> very important when distinguishing between the two.
True, but as the link I gave showed, even MS simply call it "JScript"
when the context makes it obvious that it's the .Net-flavoured version
that's being referred to.
With respect- bearing in mind particularly that it was in the context
of a question about ASP.Net, and one being asked by someone with
patchy experience at that- I'm surprised that it caused so much
confusion.
- That's because, it's not widely used at all and, despite Microsoft
referring to JScript.NET as just JScript, that is not what the programming
community in general tends to think when you say JScript (as you've seen).
Also, when you start using Visual Studio, you'll find that placing your
compiled code into the .aspx is not necessarially the norm and (as I
mentioned) your questions about the use of <script> tags made those of us
experienced in .NET development assume you meant client-side JScript,
because server-side code is very often not embedded inline into the .aspx
page at all, thus removing the need for any use of the <script> tag for
server-side programming.
I think that as you learn more about doing ASP.NET development, it will
become clear that your question(s)/comments were actually making it
difficult to understand you were talking about a server-side use for
JScript.
> Quite frankly,
> JScript.NET is not widely used at all as it makes little sense as to why
> you'd want to use it.
Because it was quick and easy at the time and my C# skills were rusty.
I've used C# for a more recent project.
> In my opinion, JScript.NET offers nothing advantagous to .NET development
Whether one approves of it or not, I think it's going a bit far to say
it offers *no* advantages. Its less formal, more "script" style and
looser typing makes writing quick and short, less serious code quicker
than in (e.g.) C#.
- It's not about my "approval". It's about my experience (and that of many
others). What I've learned in my experience, is that to really get the most
of .NET, you don't want script style code that is loosly typed and I think
that JScript.NET's failure to find a mainstream audience bears that out.
(Assuming you're not using VS, of course).
Of course, I would agree entirely that those same aspects probably
make it a poor choice for larger projects (or indeed, anything large
enough to be considered a "project"!)
- I would argue that it's a poor choice for any project. The fact is that
if you are going to work with .NET, you are in for a learning curve, there's
just no way around that. To say that you'll accept sloppy, late bound code
that doesn't scale well and is prone to runtime errors because the project
is small is not a convincing argument. If you truly like the loosly-typed,
script style of server side programming, you should stick with Classic ASP.
> and will actually impede your coding. [..] you really should
> have been asking whether using JScript.NET as your interface to the .NET
> Framework will limit how robust your code can be...and the answer to that
> is
> yes!
Yes, I agree that JScript (in any form) isn't such a great choice for
larger projects.
> VB .NET and C#
Ugh, hate the VB.Net syntax, would rather use C# anyway.
> But, the .NET Framework is not the language.
That's okay, I understand that!
> you'll find learning C# fairly simple
> in the beginning
When I used it for the first time- albeit as a one-off years ago- it
reminded me of Java with some improvements (and a different object
model, of course).
But since Java and JScript (and C# for that matter) are all modled
(syntaticly) after C-style programming, choosing JScript over C# doesn't
seem to make sense.
-Scott
|
