With .NET 4.0, writing reliable managed extensions for Internet Explorer has become possible. Unlike previous versions, each extension will run against the CLR it was compiled for instead of mindlessly grabbing the most recent version. Alas, COM interfaces are still needed.
Microsoft’s Patterns and Practices caching framework has been promoted to a part of the core .NET Framework. This framework provides a basic in-memory cache with trigger-based cache invalidation and a common wrapper for more advanced caching frameworks to share.
Paul Harrington, Principal Developer on the Visual Studio Platform Team, has written an explanation on why calling Marshal.ReleaseComObject() to dispose of a COM object from managed code is considered dangerous and recommends not using it.
Silverlight 4 supports COM+ Automation when running as an Out-Of-Browser (OOB) application with elevated privileges. Microsoft indicated that this support is a result of enterprise customers requesting such a feature, offering as an example Office automation from Silverlight.
JUnit 4.7, which has just reached Release Candidate stage includes a significant new feature: Rules. Rules are, in essence, another extension mechanism for JUnit, which can be used to add functionality to JUnit on a per-test basis. Most examples of custom runners in earlier versions of JUnit can be replaced by Rules, and new capabilities have already been added.
In this presentation recorded during QCon London 2008, Udi Dahan, The Software Simplist as he calls himself, explains why sometimes it is not enough to apply good OOP and patterns lessons. He introduces a new principle: make roles explicit.
The last few weeks, a public dispute has been going on between Joel Spolsky and Robert C Martin (Uncle Bob) about Test-Driven Development and about the SOLID principles of OO design. Here is a summary and review of the match.
Programming languages that offer more power and flexibility have been lately gaining momentum. Johnatan Tang highlights, however, the flexibility vs. productivity tradeoff in terms of program structure. Whereas multi-dispatch languages provide more flexibility in arranging code, traditional object orientation makes organizing programs easier.
From the beginning, the .NET stack had first class support for unmanaged libraries. By using P/Invoke one can access most of the Win32 API and support for COM opens up developers to a wealth of applications and third-party libraries. But should .NET developers actually take advantage of this?
The goal of modeling domain concepts through objects set by OOP has for a long time been handled in insufficient ways. In this article we introduce the concept of Composite Oriented Programming, and show how it avoids the issues with OOP and reignites the hope of being able to compose domain models with reusable pieces.
Believe it or not, C# is going to have full support for optional and named parameters. This, and other features intended for COM support, will be included in C# 4. There was also a rumor about parameterized properties.
In .NET 4 types will no longer be restricted to a single assembly. A single type, or part of a type, can be extracted from one assembly and placed into another. Why would you do this? Well first off all, to reduce the cost of including the Office Primary Interopt Assemblies from several megabytes to about 2KB by only including what you actually need.
Kasper Sørensen has created a new open source project at eobjects.dk called MetaModel. The project is a common domain model, query engine, and optimizer for different types of datastores, such as relational databases and flat files. MetaModel is a Java library that provides a fluent, object-oriented interface for SQL compliant queries.
Blogger Gustavo Duarte cursed in church when he said that learning new programming languages is often a waste of time. He said that "In reality learning a new language is a gritty business in which most of the effort is spent on low-value tasks with poor return on time invested.". But not everyone agreed.
In his latest blog post, Michael Feathers argued that object oriented programming languages offer some built-in features that facilitate testing and are therefore more recovery friendly than functional languages. Proponents of functional languages expressed strong disagreement with this statement, which provoked a very passionate debate in the blog community.