LAMP or .NET

[MrGamm]

I will admit... I have largely ignored technologies like Java in the past simply because the LAMP platform has proved to be a much larger user base and it appears to be the dominating technology in use on the web.

I find it rather difficult to understand the major differences from a practical standpoint between a .Net platform or a LAMP platform. Can the two even be directly compared?

My understanding is that microsoft actively pushes certification courses which may lead many people looking for a career in that field to take the route which may give them something which looks good on a resume. I have also leafed over these books and my premature conclusion is that the frameworks or technologies in use actually prohibit the user from learning anything useful all while restricting them to a less flexible framework which is said to have issues scaling (not that I myself have begun to worry too much about these issues yet). My practical reasoning would be that the framework does not encourage users to get down to the nitty gritty and actually learn the technologies in use but rather encourages the programmer to make use of re-usable objects which by no means are optimized for every scenario at the benefit of rapid development.

Is my analysis a valid one or a biased one?

Does the LAMP framework encourage a better breed of programmers or does .NET. Is the product delivered by a .NET development team better, more efficient and long term cost effective than a LAMP development team? Or is it more expensive, and designed specifically to bleed you of all your money by keeping programmers away from the fundamentals and locked in an obfuscated and detached framework?

If Java has not succeeded with a cross platform virtual engine, what makes Microsoft so sure it will succeed and where exactly is the support for platforms other than windows?

Is anyone aware of any .NET success stories? I can't find any and I am looking for some or for the reason why.

Additionally... would a small business have any advantages (short term, long term) launching their business in a .NET environment (asp,MsSQL,ect) vs launching it in a LAMP environment (php,MySQL,ect). For all practical purposes I would consider any company launching a business using an open source cms, crm, erp, on LAMP a part of that framework unless anyone can tell me why it isn't (practically).

[kgun]

1. The large advantage with LAMP is IMO xampp: Make your own "test webserver" in 5 minutes.
2. Sun's Java is good enough. To me it seemed like simplified C++.
3. .NET then I would personally prefer Borland C++ Builder 2009 professional. I have it on my laptap, but wonder when I get time to use it.
4. Programming patterns, if you understand that, you will understand reuse at the highest level. A lot of programming problems can be reduces to a finite number of known patterns. BETA is the best language I kow of. See the last link in my signature for more information.

[MrGamm]

Yes... of course I understand the benefits of thinking in objects... it makes interactions between different user interface elements much easier to manage. Why write a sprite based video games with procedures when your elements can be encapsulated in objects and freely interact with each other more easily...

I was always under the impression that the overhead for calling objects was an undesirable thing for a server based application. One HTTP request equals one great big giant object... Theoretically speaking... the server takes care of each http thread, processes or calls to the server in an optimized and streamlined manner where a scripting language like javascript (being very good at object oriented programming) keeping everything glued on the end users interface by launching different interface elements and having them speak to each other.

For desktop apps and windowing environments. Object oriented programming would have benefits as well allowing different objects to communicate with each other in an abstract manner rather than relying on tightly interwoven procedure.

Perhaps the difference between .NET and LAMP has more to do if you want to build streamlined server based applications or of you want to build more streamlined desktop applications?

In the end though... logic and data... is logic and data regardless of the nature of the code. Are there really any benefits to a small business? Would a small business actually have a better chance of success if all thier programmers were following an OOP style or a Procedural style... to me there are no apparently practical benefits... both styles should be adopted to fit the appropriate situation.

[kgun]

Originally Posted by MrGamm

Yes... of course I understand the benefits of thinking in objects... it makes interactions between different user interface elements much easier to manage. The equivalent

Yes a good example-

Originally Posted by MrGamm

I was always under the impression that the overhead for calling objects was an undesirable thing for a server based application. One HTTP request equals one great big giant object... Theoretically speaking... the server takes care of each thread or call to the server in an optimized and streamlined manner which a scripting language like javascript (being very good at object oriented programming) keeping everything glued on the end users interface by launching different interface elements and having them speak to each other.

The DOM model is platform independent and JS is not good at object oriented programming. It is quasi object oriented. It can simulate object oriented programming though. SIMULA is true OO with multiple inheritance. Its son BETA mentioned above has taken the class concept to a higher level, a computer pattern. An example of one such pattern is the "factory pattern" that can be used in many programming problems. With the last development in web application programming the last patterns I know of, but have not studied is AJAX patterns. You don't need OOP to pure number crunching. C is faster than C++. In Borland C++ Builder 2009 professional you can compile C as well as C++ source files.

Originally Posted by MrGamm

For desktop apps and windowing environments. Object oriented programming would have benefits as well allowing different objects to communicate with each other in an abstract manner rather than relying on tightly interwoven procedure.

I think BETA is strong on distributed objects.

Originally Posted by MrGamm

Perhaps the difference between .NET and LAMP has more to do if you want to build streamlined server based applications or of you want to build more streamlined desktop applications?

You can divide scripts / programming languages in three main categories IMO.

1. JS where you have full control over the cursor in web applications. Client scripting.
2. Interpreted scripts like PHP. Server scripting.
3. Compiled programs like C++.
4. Combinations (interpreters) between 1, 2 and 3 that can combine the power of each.

[DaveSawers]

Anything you can do in .NET you can do in LAMP too, and vice versa. Which you choose depends more on personal preferences (or prejudices).

[MrGamm]

This has been useful...

I think I may stick to LAMP and start focusing on AJAX, VML and SVG, rather than look to the benefits of a more integrated set of libraries on a windows platform.

Especially with the rise in Macintosh Computers... My logic being that I downloaded an application on windows and it required .net while on a mac is just worked. What possible benefit could that present the end user or the programmer?

I'm sticking to web apps. If I ever need to be cross platform on the desktop... I will look to java...

[sushil]

Say you decide to use LAMP to bring your Web 2.0 app to life. You hire a couple of open source programmers and tell them what you are looking to do. They may do it all with custom code written just for you but it’s more likely that they take advantage of a framework like CakePHP or Maypole or Django. (The names are funny but these open source frameworks save you thousands of hours of coding.) The thing to worry about here is not just getting the project done but rather what happens one or two years down the road.

[DaveSawers]

Originally Posted by sushil

... The thing to worry about here is not just getting the project done but rather what happens one or two years down the road.

You could say exactly the same thing about .NET too!

The advantage of using open source PHP code and JavaScript widgets in your project is that you at least have the source code. This means you can change it so it works on Windows 7 or whatever else is around the corner. Using a third party's ActiveX control leaves you potentially more exposed.

As an example, I was on a government of Canada web site at the weekend, filling in end of year tax information on their online site. In their wisdom, the Canadian government use .NET for their online activities. Right at the top of each page is a message in large type saying you have to use IE 6 or 7 or Firefox 2 as they can't get it to work on Firefox 3! And they're right, Firefox 3 just hangs when you try and use it.

You may be able to get away with s**t like that if you're a government with a captive user audience with no alternatives but I certainly wouldn't want my E-Commerce site having to put up such a notice.

[nthampi]

Originally Posted by DaveSawers

You could say exactly the same thing about .NET too!

The advantage of using open source PHP code and JavaScript widgets in your project is that you at least have the source code. This means you can change it so it works on Windows 7 or whatever else is around the corner. Using a third party's ActiveX control leaves you potentially more exposed.

As an example, I was on a government of Canada web site at the weekend, filling in end of year tax information on their online site. In their wisdom, the Canadian government use .NET for their online activities. Right at the top of each page is a message in large type saying you have to use IE 6 or 7 or Firefox 2 as they can't get it to work on Firefox 3! And they're right, Firefox 3 just hangs when you try and use it.

You may be able to get away with s**t like that if you're a government with a captive user audience with no alternatives but I certainly wouldn't want my E-Commerce site having to put up such a notice.

The problems that you mentioned with the Canadian Government website has nothing to do with the development platform. There are millions (or at least thousands) of websites that are developed using the .Net framework. If something doesn't work the way it is supposed to work, then it is just the stupid brains behind it. Unfortunately, there are too many dumb people work for Government agencies in most countries.

To the original poster, working on the .Net development platform doesn't limit anyone's ability to learn beyond it. There is so much beyond the technology in software design and deveopment.

[MrGamm]

then it is just the stupid brains behind it.

So if both a .NET development team can screw up beyond belief just as certainly as any other development team. What are the main advantages? I offer this chart to illustrate how many people defend the .NET development philosophy. Essentially .NET programmers boast that by using well know classes and libraries everyone is familiar with them so when new development teams come in at a later date they will have an easier time understanding and working on the project. Any other development team may not have this advantage because any number of different libraries may be in use. However everybody else also has continued support to back the software from which they branched essentially increasing the number on people who are working on the project at any given time exponentially.

Is this a fair comparison? If not why?


Development Paths of a .NET development team vs an Open Source Development team.

[kgun]

Here is some free source code for you: Accelerated C++

Andrew Koenig, an expert writing for the Journal of object oriented programming and C++ report, now Dr. Dobbs Journal: http://www.ddj.com/cpp/cuj.jhtml

May be the best coder I have ever corresponded with.

Note: Soruce code (packed for Windows systems using Microsoft Visual Studio .NET.

Barbara E. Moo works for AT & T.

Some of the code should be classic and easily adapted to C# and Java.

[DaveSawers]

Originally Posted by nthampi

The problems that you mentioned with the Canadian Government website has nothing to do with the development platform. There are millions (or at least thousands) of websites that are developed using the .Net framework. If something doesn't work the way it is supposed to work, then it is just the stupid brains behind it.

I almost agree with you. My point was that fixing an errant ActiveX control is much harder than fixing up a piece of open source Javascript or PHP. And yes, I have done both.

[nthampi]

Originally Posted by MrGamm

So if both a .NET development team can screw up beyond belief just as certainly as any other development team. What are the main advantages? I offer this chart to illustrate how many people defend the .NET development philosophy. Essentially .NET programmers boast that by using well know classes and libraries everyone is familiar with them so when new development teams come in at a later date they will have an easier time understanding and working on the project. Any other development team may not have this advantage because any number of different libraries may be in use. However everybody else also has continued support to back the software from which they branched essentially increasing the number on people who are working on the project at any given time exponentially.

Is this a fair comparison? If not why?



Development Paths of a .NET development team vs an Open Source Development team.

Yes and no. You are just looking at the platform itself. There are so many open source libraries available for .Net.

My point is that every technology platform has its strengths and weeknesses. No platform is perfect. You have to see the overall benefit of a particular platform for your organization.
You have to worry about the continuous support for the platform and also the availability and affordability of programmers too. Again, I may be wrong.

[MrGamm]

Originally Posted by nthampi

Yes and no. You are just looking at the platform itself. There are so many open source libraries available for .Net.

I was trying to illustrate the difference between a development route which chooses to build modules or extentions to existing Open Source CMS's. I guess my choice of using MSN and FaceBook logos might have confused it slightly.


My current understanding is that a .NET development project nearly starts from scratch with each project. There is no "CMS platform" which they begin with, but rather a library of rapid development tools which enables them to build software within a framework. Essentially... they branch from the .NET core... and never look back.

An Open Source development team might download a largely finished "CMS platform" and begin to plug in modules, and even make their own. A year later when the "CMS platform/framework" has been largely developed by the Open Source community, an upgrade can be sent to the installation, and modules spliced back in ( if they prepare properly ). Essentially, they branch, but still have the community developers on their side (depending how they treat you of course) which I would think dwarfs anything a legion of others from a .NET development team could roll out.


That was what I was trying to illustrate. Twice as many people from a .NET team creating a product which half the amount of people are required from an Open Source team to create a product in the end which is vastly superior. ( In a nutshell )


But this is just a pre-mature conception I have as I am only starting to understand the .NET people. I have completely ignored the techology until just recently. To tell you the truth. I get the impression it is FileMakerPro on steriods.

[nthampi]

Originally Posted by MrGamm

I was trying to illustrate the difference between a development route which chooses to build modules or extentions to existing Open Source CMS's. I guess my choice of using MSN and FaceBook logos might have confused it slightly.


My current understanding is that a .NET development project nearly starts from scratch with each project. There is no "CMS platform" which they begin with, but rather a library of rapid development tools which enables them to build software within a framework. Essentially... they branch from the .NET core... and never look back.

An Open Source development team might download a largely finished "CMS platform" and begin to plug in modules, and even make their own. A year later when the "CMS platform/framework" has been largely developed by the Open Source community, an upgrade can be sent to the installation, and modules spliced back in ( if they prepare properly ). Essentially, they branch, but still have the community developers on their side (depending how they treat you of course) which I would think dwarfs anything a legion of others from a .NET development team could roll out.


That was what I was trying to illustrate. Twice as many people from a .NET team creating a product which half the amount of people are required from an Open Source team to create a product in the end which is vastly superior. ( In a nutshell )


But this is just a pre-mature conception I have as I am only starting to understand the .NET people. I have completely ignored the techology until just recently. To tell you the truth. I get the impression it is FileMakerPro on steriods.

Your illustration was accurate when you leave out the open source resources available for the .Net platform. Thats why i said 'Yes and no'. There are a few open source CMS built on the .Net platform. The most popular one (as far as I know) is DotNetNuke. There may be others.

I don't know much about FileMakerPro, so I can't really compare. But, I would assume that, as a development platform, .Net is way ahead of FileMakerPro.

I am not trying to defend the .Net platform, but I just want to make a point that the .net platform is as effective and good as any other development platform out there.

[MrGamm]

Your insight has helped tremendously... thank you.

Originally Posted by nthampi

I don't know much about FileMakerPro, so I can't really compare. But, I would assume that, as a development platform, .Net is way ahead of FileMakerPro.

It's certainly debatable... the race is always on to find technology which is equally scalable, efficient, and most importantly compatible.

I would say filemaker pro is alot farther ahead than most people think considering processing power is starting to reduce the demand for technical optimization. Unfortunately... I've just never seen a website built in it which is compatible with any search engine... go figure... It certainly doesn't stop people from building a real website and reselling "scalable" product...

I would say .NET is a good run for the money on all fronts... I fear the lack of hard core geeks (or should I say the over abundance of OOP geeks) will always keep the community more focused on disposable, expensive product rather than long term, efficient product. My immediate impression is that .NET is a framework build specifically to reduce the complication of development so they could simply throw more developers at more problems, to create more business in the end, which in turn sells more microsoft product. I do not feel the product was ever designed to do anything except get people producing more, with short term progression (Billable Progression), not better product, certainly not a more efficient long term solution (if they are continual one offs from scratch most definately)...

I could certainly be skewed in my thoughts however... there are always other angles to look at. I could very well see people evolving into a hard core geeks on this platform and hitting virtually no road blocks in the end... jmo... it's all speculation...

[kgun]

Originally Posted by MrGamm

I would say .NET is a good run for the money on all fronts... I fear the lack of hard core geeks (or should I say the over abundance of OOP geeks) will always keep the community more focused on disposable, expensive product rather than long term, efficient product

Cryptical, that means unclear message. Questions:

1. Have you understood the concept of code reuse in OOP? That does not mean cut and past old code.
2. What do you know about design patterns?
3. What do you know about refactoring?

General advice: Use the technology you understand and solve your specific problem Educate, educate. The day you are finished learning, you are not finished learning, but finished.

[MrGamm]

Originally Posted by kgun

Cryptical, that means unclear message. Questions:

1. Have you understood the concept of code reuse in OOP? That does not mean cut and past old code.
2. What do you know about design patterns?
3. What do you know about refactoring?

General advice: Use the technology you understand and solve your specific problem Educate, educate. The day you are finished learning, you are not finished learning, but finished.

1. Yes... of course... A set of classes to define a data structure which can later be used to define sub classes... this leads to a "tighter" knit data structure... Instancing multiple objects or sub classes of object can essentially lead to a much more "compatible" data framework. These are concepts I understand and have for a while ( but not always )... I just found you could achieve the exact same thing with procedural...

2. Design Patterns... I work with them all day. If this has anything to do with Big-O notation... discovering the best way to reuse code for optimization security, ect... then that's about where it ends. If there are different ways to illustrate of discuss specific algorithms I am unfamiliar with it. I did port the TEA into a CMS a month or two ago... so I do know a little about "algorithms".

3. Nothing... I am entirely self taught... And my ability to define things from an orthodox academic approach is limited.


I looked up re factoring... I asssume this has everything to do with abstraction... abstracting the interface from the data, from the data base, from basically everything you can without overdoing it... I am working towards an image abstraction layer for a CMS and the file system to add in a custom permission system. So I can "refactor" the application?

[kgun]

1. Ok.

2. Is not fully understood. I think I gave you a link to BETA. Here it is again. ftp://ftp.daimi.au.dk/pub/beta/betabook/betabook.pdf Design patterns is in a sense generalized classes. If you have 1 000 000 programming problems, they may boil down to 50 design patterns, program structures. In BETA, everything is a pattern. Everything inherits from a design pattern.

3. Refactoring Home Martin Fowler is an expert.

Refactoring to patterns: I have not read that book, but the title and the URL (/xp part) indicates what it is about

[kgun]

You can download that book free in PDF format here: http://rockfish-cs.cs.unc.edu/COMP290-agile/rtp113.pdf

There are two classic books on the subjet:

The gang of fours (gof)'s Gamma, Helm, Johnson and Vlissides: "Design patterns." and

Fowlers: "Refactoring" with subtitle, "Improving the design of existing code".

Both highly recommended if you wan't to take your programming skills to a higher level.

[nthampi]

Originally Posted by kgun

1. Ok.

2. Is not fully understood. I think I gave you a link to BETA. Here it is again. ftp://ftp.daimi.au.dk/pub/beta/betabook/betabook.pdf Design patterns is in a sense generalized classes. If you have 1 000 000 programming problems, they may boil down to 50 design patterns, program structures. In BETA, everything is a pattern. Everything inherits from a design pattern.

3. Refactoring Home Martin Fowler is an expert.

Refactoring to patterns: I have not read that book, but the title and the URL (/xp part) indicates what it is about

This looks like a online course on design patterns . By the way, there are some decent books on design patterns for c# and vb.net. Of course, you will find hell lot of resources online.

[nthampi]

Originally Posted by MrGamm

Your insight has helped tremendously... thank you.



It's certainly debatable... the race is always on to find technology which is equally scalable, efficient, and most importantly compatible.

I would say filemaker pro is alot farther ahead than most people think considering processing power is starting to reduce the demand for technical optimization. Unfortunately... I've just never seen a website built in it which is compatible with any search engine... go figure... It certainly doesn't stop people from building a real website and reselling "scalable" product...

I would say .NET is a good run for the money on all fronts... I fear the lack of hard core geeks (or should I say the over abundance of OOP geeks) will always keep the community more focused on disposable, expensive product rather than long term, efficient product. My immediate impression is that .NET is a framework build specifically to reduce the complication of development so they could simply throw more developers at more problems, to create more business in the end, which in turn sells more microsoft product. I do not feel the product was ever designed to do anything except get people producing more, with short term progression (Billable Progression), not better product, certainly not a more efficient long term solution (if they are continual one offs from scratch most definately)...

I could certainly be skewed in my thoughts however... there are always other angles to look at. I could very well see people evolving into a hard core geeks on this platform and hitting virtually no road blocks in the end... jmo... it's all speculation...

Your view on .Net is not right. You are basing your opinion on the company, not on the technology. You cannot design a professional enterprise application without design patterns and OOP, in my knowledge. There are a lot of professional enterprise applications developed on .Net. All said and done, you need to stick with a technology that benifits your organization in the long run. Of course, you should think about your future as a programmer too.

[MrGamm]

Originally Posted by nthampi

You are basing your opinion on the company, not on the technology.

I am questioning how the company has structured their technology and how the community as a whole is adopting it.

Does the .Net framework accommodate ready to use MVC's, module frameworks, ajax interfaces, vml/3d engines, SAAS tools, animation capabilities, publishing workflows, html/xhtml validators or ready to go import export connections to various file formats? What is it exactly about the .NET libraries which gives someone an advantage other than it being a visual development environment, similar to what filemakerpro is?

Is dot .NET a glorified database programming environment? Just another drag and drop forms creation software?


Essentially... what would a DotNetNuke development team have as an advantage to a Drupal Development team? Is it a wiser move to trust the future of your business/career with academically intriguing philosophies or with practical approaches?

http://www.google.com/trends?q=drupa...tnetnuke%2CDNN

You cannot design a professional enterprise application without design patterns and OOP

You are absolutely correct. You cannot make software without programming. OOP and design patterns are an inherent part of programming technology in general. It is not dependent on the brand name of the technology. You will find design patterns within every piece of code you look at. What you are suggesting is that you cannot build an enterprise application without your specific understanding of design patterns and OOP, which is incorrect. Enterprise applications have been around much longer than .NET, before the OOP and procedural paradigm as well...

What's better about it? Strictly from a practical application approach.

People are moving away from development and towards CMS platforms, web services which are ready built and supported by the open source community, or professional teams which service thousands of users rather than one company. This gives a business an amazing advantage as it shaves months off of development. Is it a wise move to branch from a much more practical "framework" such as Drupal or DotNetNuke and DIY from scratch each and every time?

[kgun]

Originally Posted by MrGamm

You are absolutely correct. You cannot make software without programming. OOP and design patterns are an inherent part of programming technology in general. It is not dependent on the brand name of the technology. You will find design patterns within every piece of code you look at.

In the end, may be you have misunderstood what design patterns are.

Google (note search that link and don't plug it in your browser - There is more than one hit):

http : // st-www dot cs dot uiuc dot edu/users/patters/DPBook.pdf

and you should be able to download a version of the gof's book mentioned above. I have bought the paper version of the book, so I will not guarantee for the links you find on the SERP's. They are globally available in february 2009.

Originally Posted by MrGamm

What you are suggesting is that you cannot build an enterprise application without your specific understanding of design patterns and OOP, which is incorrect.

I think there is a misunderstanding here too. As fars as I understand, what he means is that understanding design patterns, will dramatically increase your programming efficiency. If a a company shall hire a new programmer, one that understands and can use design patterns in his projects may be preferred.

Originally Posted by MrGamm

Enterprise applications have been around much longer than .NET, before the OOP and procedural paradigm as well...

That is another story.

Originally Posted by MrGamm

People are moving away from development and towards CMS platforms, web services which are ready built and supported by the open source community, or professional teams which service thousands of users rather than one company. This gives a business an amazing advantage as it shaves months off of development. Is it a wise move to branch from a much more practical "framework" such as Drupal or DotNetNuke and DIY from scratch each and every time?

No you go off topic from your own topic.

The choice of programming language is important because it influences your point of view. That is why Simula with multiple inheritance was 20 years ahead of time (Smalltalk emerged about 20 years later). If you can say the same about BETA, fully pattern based languages should emerge around 2015. BETA (the above link to the BETA book should be a reliable source) is already one.

Note there is also an American and a Scandinavian school of OOP. Simula is still used in education at the university of Oslo. I still don't know of a better platform to learn OOP. My and Microsoft's??? preferred OOP platform is Borland C++ Builder Professional.

<quote From my old forum>

Originally Posted by KBleivik

The excellent Borland C++ Builder 2009, is now available at this

C++Builder - RAD Visual Development IDE and C++ Compiler

.................................................. .

Microsoft: Windows vista Compatibility Borland C++ Builder 2009.

C++Builder 2009 Professional is the leading rapid application development solution for C++. You get the power of the C and C++ languages and libraries with the productivity of visual rapid application development. C++Builder Professional includes an advanced IDE, powerful compiler, visual designer and extensive component library for creating user interfaces, and local database connectivity.

Source:
Windows Vista Compatibility Borland Borland C++ Builder 2009 Professional

</quote From my old forum>

[MrGamm]

I understand what a design pattern is.

It boils down to interfacing abstraction layers, reusing intuitive chunks of code with other chunks of code interchangeably.

I am arguing that .NET, php, C, or any other programming language for that matter can be designed in any manner.

I have looked at beta and it does look interesting. I have dug past the first few chapters but nothing new has been introduced from what I can tell so thus far. A pattern being synonymous with a routine... It really does appear to be the wheel being re-invented all over again. But I will be looking through it some more to make sure I don't over look anything.

Anyways... My point is... Patterns exist everywhere... A framework will not teach you which pattern is the best fit for any given situation. Only trail, error, and alot of experience will.

I recommend looking at Gary Beenes 3d animation scripts.

http://www.garybeene.com/3d/3d-vml.htm

The Matrice math of is of interest to anyone studying "patterns"...

[kgun]

Originally Posted by MrGamm

I understand what a design pattern is.

You may be a better programmer than writer.

Originally Posted by MrGamm

I have looked at beta and it does look interesting. I have dug past the first few chapters but nothing new has been introduced from what I can tell so thus far. A pattern being synonymous with a routine... It really does appear to be the wheel being re-invented all over again. But I will be looking through it some more to make sure I don't over look anything.

Not that there is also a BETA compiler. Also, note the date of publishing that book. Bjarne Strostrup, the creator of C++ knew C and Simula. In his first book he writes. That I "stole" from Simula and that I "stole" from Simula. I am not sure that other people have been quite so earnest.

Originally Posted by MrGamm

Anyways... My point is... Patterns exist everywhere... A framework will not teach you which pattern is the best fit for any given situation. Only trail, error, and alot of experience will.

Yes also sewing patterns. You can not wear a sewing pattern, but they are very useful if you want to design a new suit.

Originally Posted by MrGamm

I recommend looking at Gary Beenes 3d animation scripts.

http://www.garybeene.com/3d/3d-vml.htm

The Matrice math of is of interest to anyone studying "patterns"...

Thank you for that link.

Gof started at Department of Computer Science | University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Now I think they continue on Hillside.net - Home of the Patterns Library

The C++ Source code of their classic book is public available at Hillside.net - Design Patterns Book - Source

[MrGamm]

Originally Posted by kgun

You may be a better programmer than writer.

English might as well be my second language considering how well I write.

Thanks for the links...

[kgun]

There is more.

Associate Professor Erik Ernst has generalized BETA to GBETA. You can download the compiler with source code here:

gbeta

Note: In their Book, "Design Patterns" the gof write in chapter 6, page 357 in my edition.

"But our catalog is just a collection of related patterns; we can't pretend it's a pattern language.

In fact, we think it's unlikely that there will ever be a complete pattern language for software."


My bolding. I agree because of that word, but BETA and GBETA are pattern languages. BETA replaces classes, procedures, functions and types by a single abstraction mechanism called the pattern.

BETA was written in the beginning of 1990 and gof published their book in 1994 / 1995, so it is no less than remarkable that there is no reference in the index to Simula and BETA.