Advanced stuff

HAI GUYZ,

Anyone got any e-books they can rapid shit on advanced C# or advanced SQL?

kthxbai

Because 'advanced' isn't ambigous.
Also, too bad C# is slow as fuck.

sage for C#, and wanting advanced C# stuff
lol

>>3
>>2
Not only are you the same fag.

But C# slow as fuck?

prove this to me using Java as a benchmark.
(of course it's going to be slower than C, that's the hit you take every time you go up a level in programing, but you knew that right? fucking moron)

>>4
Haskell is the fastest language, much faster than assembly.

>>5
agreed!

But.... back on subject.... ebooks?

>>4
i am >>3 but not >>2, fag.

And stop learning C# and learn a proper language, like C or, well the ultimate HASKELL (which is a lot faster than assembly)

Hint: techbooks + undernet

I am >>7, but not >>3.

Neither assembly or haskell are as fast as lisp.

Dude, I already know C, C++, Java (not too well), and HASKELL (which is much faster than assembly) and a few others.

Now I program in C#, and I'm not _learning_ it, I want advance subjects like Garbage Collection and how all the shit works in the back end and optimization.

And HASKELL.... the college I go to actually has a REQUIRED class in HASKELL. You should check out the programing language White Space.

What advanced SQL topics do you want to know about?

>>12
Query optimization, paging (I'm in MSSQL 2005) with out chacheing full dataset (must be real time), dynamic sorting that doesn't involve concatenation of a query and then executing it completely removing the idea of stored procedures.  Different types of indexes and when you should use each one.

Them types of things.  I could just go bittorrent a bunch of e-books but I want more of a recommendation.

dynamic sorting:

select *
from [table]
order by
  case @sortindex
    when 1 then column1
    when 2 then column2
    when 3 then column3
    else null
  end

I dunno about which ebooks anyway sorry, I learned most SQL stuff from reading the manual and newsgroups.

But I got some good C++ ebooks using eMule. Search for: (the topic) CHM .. you will get tons of books in help file format.

I want advance subjects like Garbage Collection and how all the shit works in the back end and optimization.
Optimization works the same way in all procedural compiled languages. If you know how to optimize C and C++, I don't see what will be new for you in C#.

>>14
Yeah, doing that, is slow as fuck, adds about 5 seconds to a RS of 500,000 or so.

>>16
C# is pure OOP not procedural. C and C++ don't have Garbage Collection, therefore they don't have Dispose or Finalize stuff, which is used for optimization.

Also in C# you can't manipulate pointers (to an extent) so the back end is doing all of that for you. Thinks like is System.Collections.Generic.List built like a Linked List, or a Vector. Ect Ect.

>>17

Too bad Ect isn't a real fucking abbreviation, moran.

Anyway, there's nothing wrong with generating dynamic SQL.

Stored procedures aren't to be shoehorned into every available programming crevice.

ECT ECT.

Why is everyone so insistent on using mediocre languages?

ECT ECT.

>>19
It's a matter of theory and practice.

You can create static functions so that you can call them with out instantiating an object and that works fine, but is a contradiction to OOP theory.

plus generating 'dynamic' SQL is ugly as fuck.

>>18
>moran

I hope you're a troll.

>>21

gb2/learninganglish/

I'm starting to think that a /r/ on /b/ would have been more beneficial

>>22
I hope YOU'RE a troll.

>>21

Don't get too hung up on creating the perfect cleanest most theory-perfect programs; you'll never get anything finished.

>>17
C# is pure OOP not procedural. C and C++ don't have Garbage Collection, therefore they don't have Dispose or Finalize stuff, which is used for optimization.
The same shit that applies to C and C++ applies to C#. Do I really have to tell you to avoid allocations and creating objects senselessly?

GC isn't some kind of magic voodoo dust. The same rules that apply to malloc() apply to it too.

>>24
Unless you're looking for a leather-bound 20th anniversary edition of SICP signed by Abelson & Sussman with the blood of 300 BASIC programmers, you're in the wrong place.

SQL: It's a lot of relational algebra, but they had to come up with their own terms just to piss people off.

>>1
C# sucks; what do you have for it? .NET? Mono?

Read SICP and achieve satori.

>>30
Is that even relevant to the topic, or is it just your way of saying "Ive read SICP"?

>>31
Too bad Scheme is slow as fuck.

>>27
Please then, explain when it's proper to call GC.Collect() and when it is proper to use Finalize and what performance hits you might run into when using Finalize.

>>33

Oo!  Easy mode!

1)  GCs only happen implicitly on an allocation.  It's appropriate to call GC.Collect() in situations such as:
  a) You've dropped references to a large quantity of objects (as defined by memory used), but you're not going to be performing additional allocations for a while and you want to decrease your working set.
  b) You're not going to use some large quantity of objects (as defined by memory used) and you're about to make an expensive native API call, such as via PInvoke().  The native code's allocations won't trigger a GC and you want to decrease your working set prior to the call into native code.

2)  Use a Finalize() method when an object hangs onto some sort of unmanaged resource that must be manually released.  Finalize provides your safety net on the off-chance that your user is too stupid to call IDisposable.Dispose() on your object.  (You did implement IDisposable, didn't you?)

Any code with a finalizer should also implement IDisposable so that users can release its resources deterministically.

As far as performance hits, whenever an object is queued for Finalization, it will always be promoted a generation.  No finalizable objects die in Gen0, they always live to at least Gen1.  (Excepting, of course, cases where the proper pattern has been followed and GC.SuppressFinalize(this); has been called from Dispose(Boolean disposing);.)  Making objects needlessly finalizable will promote them to Gen1 and cause more memory pressure than is necessary.

>>33
explain when it's proper to call GC.Collect()
Uh... never? If you just have to call it, call it when you're waiting on the user.

when it is proper to use Finalize
To clean up unmanaged resources, geez. It's similar to C++'s RAII, except you no longer need to worry about memory.

I'm curious why you think Finalize has anything to do with optimization, other than the obvious overhead of calling it to clean up? That's like saying a C++ destructor is used for optimization. It's a completely unrelated topic.

Nothing to see here. Move along.

LISP

Bringing /prog/ back to its people
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy
All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy