Flutterby™! : Really

Next unread comment / Catchup all unread comments User Account Info | Logout | XML/Pilot/etc versions | Long version (with comments) | Weblog archives | Site Map | | Browse Topics


2011-08-11 13:46:18.367047+00 by Dan Lyke 2 comments

Really, .NET has no simple way to do a POST with CGI encoding? It's like programming in 1994 all over again.

[ related topics: Software Engineering ]

comments in descending chronological order (reverse):

#Comment Re: made: 2011-08-11 17:04:07.331532+00 by: Dan Lyke

As I mentioned to Shawn, I think .NET is trying to get me to bend over to pick up the SOAP.

It's all about vendor lock-in. Use their obscure overly complex "standard", or use the standard that's been out there for years and end up rewriting code that I abandoned in 1994 'cause it was obsolete there.

It's horribly frustrating when I keep having the "I could implement this in two hours on Linux, but it's going to take a full person-week of coding on Windows. Despite VisualStudio's auto-complete."

#Comment Re: made: 2011-08-11 16:32:23.833888+00 by: meuon [edit history]

Welcome to my world. A &quotUtility System Interoperability Multi Vendor Speaking" standards certification body recently sent me their &quotOpen Specification&quot. It was in a .EAP file, which is a UML Document encoded in a Jet database that is only useful by &quotEnterprise Architect Pro" by Sparx Systems. The software isn't that bad, it runs in Windows and it makes creating pretty drawings easy. But it barfs when trying to generate an actual XML file sample, or DTD's, or WSDL's from the spec .EAP file. They admit the spec is used by .Net and Java shops mostly.

Explaining the differences in POST/PUT/GET and a Socket, plus their lack of authentication or encryption to their IEEE'd Obtuse mindset enough to make my head explode.