Bill Blogs in C# - All Comments

re: My 24 hours with Chrome

Ricardo Villamil — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 16:13:42 GMT

Hi Bill, very interesting point of view, I had never thought of Google that way, but I think you are 100% correct, I will start paying more attention to what info I give them.

Ricardo.

P/S: I must say I love your articles but the white on black is almost painful to read. And it's even more painful when you're finished on your site and go back to the 'standard' black over white ;)

re: My 24 hours with Chrome

Richard Reukema — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 16:09:13 GMT

Bill - I could not have said it better! My take on this is the same, but I take another angle. If Google is making so much money from user profiles - why aren' the users benefiting? Sure we get the service, but without my data, Google makes nothing! I understand that if Google does not make money, we don't get the service. But is Google hurting for coin? How much money do you need to have to be successful? Why not allocated a % back to those that have made you successful? How about being a good corporate citizen?

Second thoughts on Google's Chrome browser

Scott's musings — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 13:56:18 GMT

So, we're 3 days into Chrome and 2 major themes have emerged: 1. The G-man is watching There are

re: My 24 hours with Chrome

Peter — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 11:49:47 GMT

>> The EULA has another clause (which Google is updating, but I haven't seen the updates) that gives Google a non-exclusive license to all content created with Chrome.

But this was just a mistake. Take it a bit more easy, please.

re: My 24 hours with Chrome

Si — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 02:02:51 GMT

Fair enough, technically I find it very fast and for an early beta, well polished.

Your EULA concerns are valid and should be addressed. However, given their massive reach (a link is now on the main google search page) I really wonder how much of a problem it will be for them?

Remember also it's FOSS and a BSD license at that, so if enough of the tech-savy EULA angst continues, then what's there to stop a fork?

From reading the PR releases, so consume with a large grain of salt, they don't seem too concerned with dominating browser market share, just getting better web tech out to the market, hence the liberal licensing. I certainly don't have a problem with that!

Competition is good. IE 7 & 8 probably wouldn't exist (yet) if it weren't for Firefox. Personally I find their approach a refreshing and welcome change of tactics from the standard Microsoft model.

Regardless, it will be interesting to see how much traction they will get:

www.w3schools.com/.../browsers_stats.asp

re: My 24 hours with Chrome

AdamC — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 01:30:14 GMT

It also indexes every page you visit, including all https traffic. Yeah, there is "incognito" mode, but still, it is https..

www.tgdaily.com/.../108

re: Code from Lightning Talk: Compiler Tricks

wwagner — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 12:14:06 GMT

Mark,

Object Initializers are a compile time feature in C# 3.0. That means you can use it in projects that target the 2.0 framework. The framework targeting feature ensures that you don't use features in the newer versions of the framework that may not be installed on your target machine.

re: Euler Problem 10

Slobodan Filipovic — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 10:25:02 GMT

futher improvements

instead of

var range = Enumerable.Range(2, int.MaxValue-1);

you can loop union of 2 + odd numbers

odd numbers :

Enumerable.Range(1,int.MaxValue-)/2).Select(x => 2 * x + 1);

re: Code from Lightning Talk: Compiler Tricks

Mark — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 18:49:36 GMT

I didn't realize you could initialize objects in this manner until seeing your post. I fired up Visual Studio and gave it a shot. You mentioned "new" object initializer syntax in your post, but I compiled under .NET Framework 2.0 in VS 2008 and it appeared to work. Am I missing something? When was this feature introduced?

Thanks.

re: Euler Problem 10

george byrkit — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 23:52:07 GMT

Bravo, Bill!

And using this technique, (TakeWhile vs FindAll), Euler #7, my version, runs in approx .29 seconds (vs 20 seconds with my original attempt). That's ~10 times faster than Bill's original implementation (about 2.5 seconds on my machine.) I had only tried a simple attempt, as work is a bit overbearing at the moment.

I always learn a lot from Bill and his books. It's wonderful to be able to work interactively on such problems with a 'master' and improve one's own skills (such as via a website like this). I knew the flaw in my original approach (creating a new list after traversing the entire KnownPrimes list, for each potential prime being tested).

One of the more difficult things for me, an 'only programmer' at my employer (and 57, with many years of programming experience), is who are my peers, and how do I reach (out to) them to discuss the problems/issues that I run into, and how do I solve these problems? It's so wonderful to have people like Bill in the Ann Arbor (and online) programming community. The Ann Arbor Computing Society, some of the .Net user groups in the area, and contacts made thru both types of groups, constitute the peers that I have access to.

I'll certainly add TakeWhile and extending TrueForAll (and other methods) to my 'bag of tricks'.

re: Euler Problem 9

Octavio Hernandez — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 12:37:31 GMT

Bill,

The nature of this problem and of your and Patrick's solutions closely resemble those of a problem/solutions I posted in my blog some time ago:

geeks.ms/.../should-we-learn-a-new-way-of-writing-loops.aspx

Regards,

Octavio

Los problemas de Euler y LINQ

Sobre C#, LINQ y algo más... — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 12:22:32 GMT

Revisando nuevos enlaces aparecidos durante agosto en la página de C# de MSDN, he dado con el blog de

Los problemas de Euler y LINQ

Sobre C#, LINQ y algo más... — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 12:22:31 GMT

Revisando nuevos enlaces aparecidos durante agosto en la página de C# de MSDN, he dado con el blog de

re: Euler Problem 9

Koen — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 11:17:15 GMT

I guess you want to add A, B and C in the last line rather than multiplying them...

Euler 10

Patrick Steele — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 13:24:13 GMT

After tackling number 9 yesterday , I thought I'd do #10 real quick since it seemend pretty easy