— This upcoming video may not be available to view yet.
Existing work
Firstly, after doing this much work, I have discovered someone already has done a similar investigation: How long is a Star Trek title? by Bruce Bennett, so check that out. One thing it does have that I don’t, is charts.
Improving workflow
The analysis so far has been done using a Google Docs spreadsheet. I then manually wrote the Markdown for the blog posts, which involved some tedious and error prone tables.
I was originally not going to include the giant list of every single-word episode title, since creating that table did not look like fun.
But… I also started working a little program to do more sophisticated processing, and realised I could also make the program generate the Markdown for me.
The program is a .NET 7 console application writen in C#, and writing it was probably quicker than the manipulation I had to do with the spreadsheet in the first place. It was definitely quicker than producing the Markdown tables in the first post manually.
The end result is I can generate tables of all sorts of random episode lists with different properties of varying levels of interest with very little effort.
— This upcoming video may not be available to view yet.
It is often necessary in computer systems to get the current date and time. .NET has had a straightforward way to do that since its inception. What it hasn’t had is a built-in way to customize the behavior, particularly for mocking during automated tests.
Quite why this situation has persisted for so long is a bit of mystery. The importance of automated tests has only risen over time and questions about how to deal with this crop up quite frequently. The general solution is to provide an abstraction that you can inject and mock easily.
The popular date and time library Noda Time includes IClock, and any developers are often directed to use Noda Time for anything making use of anything but the simplest of time-based logic. But it is still odd there is nothing built-in, especially considering there is an existing private implementation in .NET, as well as severalinASP.NET.
Well .NET 8 will finally be getting System.TimeProvider:
namespaceSystem{/// <summary>Provides an abstraction for time. </summary>publicabstractclassTimeProvider{protectedTimeProvider();publicstaticTimeProviderSystem{get;}publicstaticTimeProviderFromLocalTimeZone(TimeZoneInfotimeZone);publicabstractDateTimeOffsetUtcNow{get;}publicDateTimeOffsetLocalNow{get;}publicabstractTimeZoneInfoLocalTimeZone{get;}publicabstractlongGetTimestamp();publicabstractlongTimestampFrequency{get;}publicTimeSpanGetElapsedTime(longstartingTimestamp,longendingTimestamp);publicabstractITimerCreateTimer(TimerCallbackcallback,object?state,TimeSpandueTime,TimeSpanperiod);}}
As well as providing a mockable abstraction to get the current time (including a default implementation providing the system time), it also adds supports to a bunch of other APIs to use a specified instance instead including Task and Timer.
And, best of all, despite my earlier claim that this is a .NET 8 feature, this will also be made available as a package targeting .NET Standard 2.0, so it can be used on .NET Framework and other targets.
— This upcoming video may not be available to view yet.
There is now a preview package for Blazor that allows creating custom elements.
Custom elements are part of the Web Components standards and are intended to be a way of defining tags that can be consumed in HTML and interoperate with each other.
That content is rendered as a custom element (in this case <ttt-settings short-code="T_D4_S6x6_W3_T0_P0_M1_O1_F0"></ttt-settings>). Since the site is statically generated with no frontend framework, I wrote the element in vanilla JavaScript. Blazor support for custom elements means I could rewrite that component in C#.
One of the reviewers suggested moving the second if outside the call to InvokeOnMainThread (and then combining it with the other if).
The theory was that it would more efficient to check if we need to be on the main thread before we do it, instead of doing the check on the main thread and finding out we have nothing to do.
The original author pushed back saying you can’t access _detailsView off the main thread since you would get an exception.
On the surface this sounds reasonable - everyone knows you can only access UIKit objects on the main thread. But it naturally leads to the question: what does “accessing a UIKit object” actually mean?
So I wrote a quick sample that intentionally tries to do lots of UIKit manipulation on background threads in various ways:
The tests
Quick refresher. The View property of a newly constructed UIViewController is not populated until it is first accessed. Some of the tests below refer to accessing this property either before or after it is created. By default properties declared in C# will not be visible to any native iOS code. They can be made visible by adding the [Export] attribute.
Create a UIViewController.
Create a UIView.
Create a UIColor.
Check if a view controller’s View property is equal to null.
Check if a view controller’s View property is null using pattern matching.
Check if a view controller’s IsViewLoaded property is equal to true.
Check if a view controller’s View property is equal to null after previously creating View on the main thread.
Check if a view controller’s View property is null using pattern matching after previously creating View on the main thread.
Check if a view controller’s IsViewLoaded property is equal to true after previously creating View on the main thread.
Check if a new UIView property, that is not exported is equal to null.
Check if a new UIView property, that is not exported is null using pattern matching.
Check if a new UIView property, that is exported is equal to null.
Check if a new UIView property, that is exported is null using pattern matching.
Check if a view controller’s NavigationController property is equal to null.
Check if a view controller’s NavigationController property is null using pattern matching.
Set a new UIView property, that is not exported, with a view created on the main thread.
Set a new UIView property, that is exported, with a view created on the main thread.
Results
Test
Result
Create UIViewController
Exception
Create UIView
Exception
Create UIColor
OK
Check if View is equal to null
Exception
Check if View is null pattern
Exception
Check if View is loaded
Exception
Check if View is equal to null after creating View
Exception
Check if View is null pattern after creating View
Exception
Check if View is loaded after creating View
Exception
Check if non-exported view is equal to null
OK
Check if non-exported view is null pattern
OK
Check if exported view is equal to null
OK
Check if exported view is null pattern
OK
Check if NavigationController is equal to null
Exception
Check if NavigationController is null pattern
Exception
Set non-exported view
OK
Set exported view
OK
Summary
This is by no means exhaustive, but it seems in general, acessing properties declared natively in iOS will throw an exception whereas accessing properties you have declared yourself will be fine. I had a suspicion that an exported view might behave the same as a native property, but apparently not.
Not much of a thing for actual functionality, but a significant symbolic milestone.
Handlers and the great big architecture shift
.NET MAUI will completely change the way renderers are handled in Xamarin Forms. There are many advantages of doing it the new way, but the mechanics of how it is done are fairly complex. This video by Javier Suárez covers it well.
Originally an ASP.NET concept, that then migrated its way to Windows client development, this provides a common way to provide dependency injection, logging, and lots of other infrastructure stuff. In isolation, the pattern and implementation is good and will make it easier to override certain things in MAUI (such as handlers). It’s also useful in a wider sense since it will make configuring different styles of .NET apps more similar.
Single project
Over the past couple of years there has been a move towards producing Xamarin libraries (and .NET libraries in general) using a single multi-targeted project. The most significant is probably Xamarin Essentials. This PR adds support for creating applications following the same pattern.
Merging in Xamarin Essentials
There is a lot of functionality in Xamarin Essentials that Xamarin Forms would like to use. Likewise there is some functionality in Forms that is useful when not using Forms. This lead to some overlap in functionality (and occasionally overlap in APIs but not a perfect match in functionality).
Now the solution is to have Forms and Essentials in the same repo. I hope Essentials remains available as its own Nuget package (and it looks like that will be the case).
Resizetizer.NT
Resizertizer.NT, like its predecessor Resizetizer, is a package for generating platform specific images in all the right sizes at build time.
Managing image assets across iOS and Android (and using Visual Studio) has always been an unpleasant process. This tool makes it much easier and will be included in MAUI by default.
It’s an evolution of Xamarin Forms. It basically is Xamarin Forms, but finally accepting some breaking changes. To be honest, I’m hoping for a lot since there is a lot of weirdness in Xamarin Forms that has been holding it back.
Single project, multi-targeted. It took a long time to get to the point where this was possible. From shared projects, to PCL projects, through .NET Standard. This should make things a lot easier.
Still based on platform renderers using native controls. This is a mixed bag. Using native controls has long been a selling point of Xamarin (with or without Forms). With the rise of Flutter this has been shown to be less important. Many people have been asking for consistent platform agnostic renderers instead.
The end of “Xamarin” as a name. Some time in the .NET 6 timeline (end of 2021) Xamarin.iOS will become .NET for iOS and Xamarin.Android will be .NET for Android. I have mixed feeling about this since this was a fairly succinct way to describe by top skillset.
— This upcoming video may not be available to view yet.
screenshot
Xamarin Forms uses a naive conversion from it’s platform independent Color class to iOS’s CGColor, and as a result, Frame controls end up with inconsistent background colors. I’ve added a demo here.
— This upcoming video may not be available to view yet.
One of my most read (and most commented on) posts was the one claiming “ASP.NET sucks”, which only goes to show being a little offensive goes disappointingly far on the internet. Since it has now been five years since I posted that, I thought a quick follow-up was in order.
I stand by most of what I said my initial post, but with a little specificity. It’s not ASP.net that’s the problem but Webforms. Unfortunately at the time Webforms was all you ever saw. There are alternatives around today (and may have been back then but none were especially high profile and none were by Microsoft). These days of course Webforms are very much out of fashion. Following on from the success of Rails Microsoft realised that Webforms weren’t an idea that could keep up with modern web development. A quick glance at the ASP.net home page today shows four out of five articles talking solely about ASP.net MVC and one article talking about both MVC and Webforms (of course that will vary by day I but I doubt the result will be very different).
So taking into account a minor title change (ASP.net Webforms suck!) I’d say my original point stands.
— This upcoming video may not be available to view yet.
More than two months since my last post. Which means I suddenly have a lot to say. Beware, rambling may follow… Nearly five months ago I claimed to be making “rapid progress with language learning”. Well obviously not rapid enough to actually reveal anything. Well that might be at an end soon.
One of the problems of writing the app using things like LINQ means most people will have other things to install to use the app (.NET 3.5 specifically - and possibly .NET 3.0 for non Vista users) and even then it’s limited to Windows users as Mono support for Windows Presentation Foundation will be a long way off (if they do it all). Since Silverlight 2.0 is supposed to be really cool and now supports a big chunk of the widgets from standard WPF (and has has quickly developing Moonlight support), why not write the app in that? So that’s what I’ve been doing. And it was a lot easier than I thought.
The first piece of easiness I found was that I only had to make like three changes to my non-UI code to make it compile as a Silverlight DLL. Unfortunately I can’t persuade Visual Studio to compile it as a Silverlight DLL and a normal DLL in one go, so I’ve currently got the same code added as two different projects and I copy the code between them (not ideal). The only real work I had to do was reimplement my data provider. When I started, I cunningly made sure that all resources (lessons, media, user progress) were grabbed from a data class. I wrote a new class that fetches it from a RESTful server (more on that in another post). So hopefully, a nice Silverlight version of the app will be public soon.
About Silverlight
For those that don’t know, Silverlight is Microsoft’s answer to Flash. Apparently. I’m not sure if it’s that a good analogy really. Silverlight 1.0 basically gave you access to a nice environment to draw things in the browser and then manipulate it with Javascript. Or something. To be honest I didn’t really care about version 1.0 since writing complicated things in Javascript doesn’t sound like fun. Silverlight 2.0 (formerly Silverlight 1.1) on the other hand gives you that same environment but the ability to manipulate the things with compiled .NET assemblies written in any CLR language and comes with implementations of a lot of the widgets in the WPF.