Archive
Monthly
Go
|
|
DNN Blog
May
26
Posted by:
Scott Willhite
5/26/2010 4:22 PM
Shaun first launched DotNetNuke on December 24, 2002. I don’t think it’s a stretch to suggest that the first inquiry about a C# version came in on about December 25. And they have continued to come in on a fairly regular basis igniting all sorts of “language wars” which continue to this day. Scott Wiltamuth is the Microsoft Product Unit Manager for Visual Studio Languages and recently described the co-evolution of VB and C# from his point of view.
2004 seemed to be the year of the great DotNetNuke C# debates on the ASP.Net forums, our own Bruce Hopkins finally pinned a response which we transposed to our own forum to preserve it. Basically, although we’re as interested in C# as the next developer, DotNetNuke originated in VB.Net and there’s never been a compelling enough reason to change that. However, there is no shortage of fodder for comparison on both sides of the ongoing debate. For example:
- A 2007 Forrester Research poll indicated that 59% of .Net developers use only VB.Net
- Scott Wiltamuth (cited above) indicates “the most reliable numbers we have… show roughly equal adoption” for VB.Net and C#.
- A 2008 telerik survey suggested that C# (63%) had surpassed VB.Net (34%) as the primary programming language
- And Scott Hanselman cracked me up with equating rooting for VB like rooting for the Red Sox.
I dare you to google net vb vs c# and see what kind of interesting reading you can find *grin*.
There still is not a compelling reason to change or a clear picture of advantage. Heck, there’s not even a clear consensus on what constitutes advantage. What we do know is that a lot of people have been interested in this for a long time and we now have a community member who is quite serious about helping us keep up with a C# version! And we also have a DotNetNuke Corp engineer working alongside them to keep up the momentum. Thank you Ben for your commitment and to our own Keivan Beigi for working alongside him!
One thing to note is that these package are NOT currently tested. This is where I stick in the obligatory legalese:
Use at your own risk! At present this is strictly a project for developer interest. Although the contributors are professional and conscientious, there is no official testing or validation applied to this code base or packages. We highly discourage any attempt at production usage based on this risk.
Right now, there are published packages of the C# source for version 5.4.1 and 5.4.2. The team is working on adding this packaging to our automated build process so that new packages can be created quickly once the conversion has been done. A normal turnaround should be just a few days after each regular release.
If you’d like to discuss the C# project, I’ve pinned a thread in the development forum for that purpose. I hope you’ll let us know what you think!
19 comment(s) so far...
Re: DotNetNuke source in C#. Yeah, Really.
Well, it is an interesting sidebar, but I still don't get the point. It's a compiled solution, so it makes no practical difference. But what fun to open up the debate can'o'worms again!
By Bruce Chapman on
5/26/2010 11:03 PM
|
Re: DotNetNuke source in C#. Yeah, Really.
Very good
By xakep bean on
5/26/2010 11:04 PM
|
Re: DotNetNuke source in C#. Yeah, Really.
Great! This has been a long-waited version that C# developers looking for. I have been thinking of using DNN a few years ago but I hesitated because there's no C# version. I'm a C# developer and have all my libraries or codes written in C#. Having a project with mixed C# and VB codes makes maintenance more difficult. The developer must know both languages to maintain it.
Thanks for the effort for building the C# version. I will definitely use it. I believe this will push the popularity of DNN to another level!
By steve siu on
5/26/2010 11:04 PM
|
Re: DotNetNuke source in C#. Yeah, Really.
@Bruce ~ We tend to be reasonably objective about these kinds of things, which is why the effort has never been expended to date to tackle this in any meaningful way before. A one time conversion is one thing, but ongoing maintenance is another. Ben (zyhfish) has been a great volunteer, however, and proven both his enthusiasm and ability to keep up. Since he's committing, we're committing to support him. And if this proves to be popular we'll invest more resources in it for the community.
By Scott Willhite on
5/26/2010 11:13 PM
|
Re: DotNetNuke source in C#. Yeah, Really.
@steve siu ~ Thanks for the encouragement! I hope you'll provide your feedback or reactions in the thread cited above... these things go better when we know whats on everyone's mind. Cheers!
By Scott Willhite on
5/26/2010 11:17 PM
|
Re: DotNetNuke source in C#. Yeah, Really.
it's like a dream to hear it was realized now :) thanks a lot.
By mavera1 on
5/27/2010 6:22 AM
|
Re: DotNetNuke source in C#. Yeah, Really.
can anyone help me to install and run dnn c# version 5.4.2 in localhost and VS2008 .
when i run the sln file in visual studio 2008, it shows me error - "unable to read the project file 'DotNetNuke.library.csproj' the tools version 4.0 is unrecognized" this type of same error continues.
also when i try to install in IIS localhost using the 'website' folder located in the 'DotNetNuke_Community_CS_05.04.02_Source.zip' file i also get error in web.config file like -
not found and more.
also i get error that the following are not found in the Global.asax.cs file-
using DotNetNuke.ComponentModel;
using DotNetNuke.Common.Utilities;
can anyone guide me to install?.also can anyone tell me where can i find the default dnn forum in c#?
By Mridul Samadder on
5/27/2010 6:31 AM
|
Re: DotNetNuke source in C#. Yeah, Really.
You may be interested in reviewing the life cycle of Rocky Lhotka's CSLA framework. This project began as a VB (yes, before .Net) project, and evolved to VB.Net before picking up simultaneous support for C#. Over a period of years, the momentum of new development swung to C#, with the VB.Net version of CSLA lagging behind. Just last year, Rocky announced that the "official" release was going to be C# only, with a VB.Net port available via the efforts of community contributors.
I'd bet you a frosty beverage that if you asked Rocky, he'd have some opinions about what he'd do differently were he to do it all over again.
By David Lambert on
5/27/2010 6:24 AM
|
Re: DotNetNuke source in C#. Yeah, Really.
Bruce, there may be no practical difference, but some of us prefer to code in C# rather than VB.Net in our world. I use to be an avid VB/VB.Net programmer, but switch to C# some time ago and prefer that much better than VB.
I really don't see this as a can of worms, but more the direction .Net developers have been evolving too in the past few years.
Funny enough, I was a die hard VB guy, but after I did my first project in C#, I haven't looked back since.
By John Akermanis on
5/27/2010 6:28 AM
|
Re: DotNetNuke source in C#. Yeah, Really.
I am excited to see where this goes, either way - this, coming from a die-hard VB developer. :) Regardless, I should point out that any .Net developer who is serious about development should spend time knowing and using both VB and C#. Not doing so can seriously hamper your career/project path.
By Will Strohl on
5/27/2010 6:25 AM
|
Re: DotNetNuke source in C#. Yeah, Really.
@steve siu Just to be clear. Eventhough DNN is written in VB you can still develop your modules and extensions in C#. I have done a lot of developing for DNN and have never needed to go into the DNN source to make any changes. Also, it is not recommended to make any changes to the DNN code as you will lose the ability to easily upgrade to newer versions. I only go into the DNN source sometimes to see how things are done.
By Stephan Snoek on
5/27/2010 6:27 AM
|
Re: DotNetNuke source in C#. Yeah, Really.
thanks for great support from DNN group, i hope the C# version can make sense to our community.
By Ben on
5/27/2010 6:32 AM
|
Re: DotNetNuke source in C#. Yeah, Really.
While I welcome the introduction of a C# version, it is still important to make a few points.
1. There is nothing today stopping a C# from working on DNN. The only need for VB is if the developer feels the need to modify core DNN code - either for their own needs or to submit a code-patch.
2. There is also no need from a purely technical need to switch to C# either. Mono has full support for VB as a supported language, and Linux only impacts the "compiled" IL anyway.
3. Where there is a benefit in C#, is in two areas - (a) perception - for better or worse the reality is that many developers view VB as a hobby language, DNN proves it is not, but perception is reality, and (b) recruitment - almost every developer we have hired that has not been a DNN developer has been primarily a C# developer.
Now having said all that good developers should be language agnostic - we should be able to "speak" multiple languages.
By Charles Nurse on
5/27/2010 6:30 AM
|
Re: DotNetNuke source in C#. Yeah, Really.
Great news. I hope it goes as CSLA did. Yes, it makes no practical difference to those who use DNN without modifying the core. But as Charles Nurse said, almost everyone they recruit is primarily a C# developer. How many would be volunteers have shied away because they prefer to work in C#? I think C# will attract more developers.
-Dan
Coded in VB for 12 years before switching to C# 2 years ago.
By kukabuka on
5/27/2010 8:19 AM
|
Re: DotNetNuke source in C#. Yeah, Really.
@David ~ I'm aware of Rocky's journey, but have never had a conversation with him. That sounds like a pretty good idea and I will try to follow up, perhaps invite him to the conversation! Thanks.
By David Lambert on
5/27/2010 9:10 AM
|
Re: DotNetNuke source in C#. Yeah, Really.
Midrul asks a good question (grin) ... where the DNN Forum for C#?
Makes my case even stronger: www.cto20.com/post/DotNetNuke-in-C-My-Opinion-on-The-Subject.aspx
:-)
By Antonio Chagoury on
5/27/2010 10:16 AM
|
Re: DotNetNuke source in C#. Yeah, Really.
@Antonio ~ The last sentence in the blog identifies a specific pinned post for discussion... with a promise to establish a dedicated forum if it is merited. :-)
By Scott Willhite on
5/27/2010 10:19 AM
|
Re: DotNetNuke source in C#. Yeah, Really.
I held off adopting DNN for years because it was VB and I needed the ability to modify the core due to DNN's early problems with scalability and resource efficiency. DNN is in a better place now and why I felt better adopting it.
However.
I prefer my core platforms written in a language immediately accessible to more senior talent. The majority of programmers are high-level application developers so it's not surprising they come from the classic ASP/VB pool.
Engineers with substantial experience in enterprise middle and platform tier though tend to come from the C/C++/Java pool.
So to me it is not a question of "language wars" - it's one of human resources.
While clearly there are many very talented VB.NET programmers out there the truth is most enterprise developers don't use VB.NET. Or like it. I started off in Fortran and COBOL so I'm no stranger to verbose languages - I can sling VB.NET and C# all day.
But I'd rather be able to bring in folks with substantial distributed data/network experience without forcing them to learn a new language. Application developers are more common, cheaper to find, and are perfectly suited to writing VB.NET modules over the C# core.
By Dave Scheffer on
6/12/2010 9:54 PM
|
Re: DotNetNuke source in C#. Yeah, Really.
This is great; was there any refactoring done during the translation process? Seems like it would have been an excellent time to refactor tired code to eliminate bottlnecks and increase speed.
By Richard Golko on
10/15/2010 11:09 AM
|
|