<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="RSS_xslt_style.asp" version="1.0" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:WebWizForums="https://syndication.webwiz.net/rss_namespace/">
 <channel>
  <title>Codejock Developer Community : DotNet or Not DotNet? (Repost)</title>
  <link>http://forum.codejock.com/</link>
  <description><![CDATA[This is an XML content feed of; Codejock Developer Community : Toolkit Pro : DotNet or Not DotNet? (Repost)]]></description>
  <copyright>Copyright (c) 2006-2013 Web Wiz Forums - All Rights Reserved.</copyright>
  <pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2026 15:45:28 +0000</pubDate>
  <lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Oct 2003 17:52:03 +0000</lastBuildDate>
  <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
  <generator>Web Wiz Forums 12.04</generator>
  <ttl>360</ttl>
  <WebWizForums:feedURL>forum.codejock.com/RSS_post_feed.asp?TID=176</WebWizForums:feedURL>
  
  <item>
   <title><![CDATA[DotNet or Not DotNet? (Repost) : Hello There! To answer your questions... The...]]></title>
   <link>http://forum.codejock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=176&amp;PID=361&amp;title=dotnet-or-not-dotnet-repost#361</link>
   <description>
    <![CDATA[<strong>Author:</strong> <a href="http://forum.codejock.com/member_profile.asp?PF=1">kstowell</a><br /><strong>Subject:</strong> 176<br /><strong>Posted:</strong> 16 October 2003 at 5:52pm<br /><br /><P>Hello There!</P><P>To answer your questions...</P><P>The Xtreme Suite which consists of Docking Pane, Command Bars and Property Grid is indeed a .NET WinForms component.&nbsp; The .NET component was created using&nbsp;managed code this is obvious by the <SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 8.5pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-: EN-US; mso-fareast-: EN-US; mso-bidi-: AR-SA">dependency </SPAN>on mfc70.dll and is no mystery.</P><P>Since our products must have <strong>cross-language support</strong> (Visual C++/MFC, Visual Basic/ActiveX and .NET), using managed code&nbsp;was the most logical approach.&nbsp; This also provides encapsulation so we do not need to maintain <SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 8.5pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-: EN-US; mso-fareast-: EN-US; mso-bidi-: AR-SA">multiple </SPAN>code repositories for each language, and can concentrate our development efforts in one place.</P><P><FONT color=#000000>In case you <strong>don't know</strong> what managed code is here is a quote from MSDN, managed code runs within the context of the .NET run-time environment:</FONT></P><P><FONT color=#0000ff>"A program written with managed code using Managed Extensions for C++, for example, can operate with the common language runtime to provide services such as memory management, cross-language integration, code access security, and automatic lifetime control of objects."</FONT></P><P>The <strong>bottom line</strong> is in a "DotNET only world" you would see this&nbsp;product completely re-written in C# <IMG src="http://forum.codejock.com/smileys/smiley2.gif" border="0">.&nbsp; However to maintain cross-language support&nbsp;"ie: real world"&nbsp;there is no practical reason to completely rewrite the product using C# and maintain two separate code bases.&nbsp; As you can <SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 8.5pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY: Tahoma; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-: EN-US; mso-fareast-: EN-US; mso-bidi-: AR-SA">imagine</SPAN>, this would be a huge&nbsp;loss of time and&nbsp;resources.</P><P>Kind regards,<BR>Codejock Support</P><span style="font-size:10px"><br /><br />Edited by Administrator</span>]]>
   </description>
   <pubDate>Thu, 16 Oct 2003 17:52:03 +0000</pubDate>
   <guid isPermaLink="true">http://forum.codejock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=176&amp;PID=361&amp;title=dotnet-or-not-dotnet-repost#361</guid>
  </item> 
  <item>
   <title><![CDATA[DotNet or Not DotNet? (Repost) : Because my previous post was removed...]]></title>
   <link>http://forum.codejock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=176&amp;PID=360&amp;title=dotnet-or-not-dotnet-repost#360</link>
   <description>
    <![CDATA[<strong>Author:</strong> <a href="http://forum.codejock.com/member_profile.asp?PF=98">boa1968</a><br /><strong>Subject:</strong> 176<br /><strong>Posted:</strong> 16 October 2003 at 8:54am<br /><br /><P>Because my previous post was <strong>removed</strong> after one month of silence, I'm reposting it again.</P><P>I'm very interesting in the new .NET version of XT. However, after downloading an evaluating, I detected that this is not a real .NET library - it just wraps the existing MFC/Win32 framework. Is it true? If so, I would not recommend using it. CJ team, do you plan to create native .NET components?</P><P>P.S. to see <strong>MFC/Win32</strong> legacy dependencies, just try to run </P><P>Ildasm.exe /adv </P><P>and open one of XP.NET DLLs such as CodeJock.XtremeCommandBars.dll. In addition, why do you distribute <strong>mfc70.dll</strong>, if you call the package .NET?</P><P>It remembers me the old good days when not so experienced coders claimed, that they're "writing programs under Windows", but it was native MS DOS code run inside DOS box <IMG src="http://forum.codejock.com/smileys/smiley17.gif" border="0"></P><P>Wating for your answer.</P>]]>
   </description>
   <pubDate>Thu, 16 Oct 2003 08:54:47 +0000</pubDate>
   <guid isPermaLink="true">http://forum.codejock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=176&amp;PID=360&amp;title=dotnet-or-not-dotnet-repost#360</guid>
  </item> 
 </channel>
</rss>