Activity overview
Latest activity by avidtrober
caddzooks wrote:
avidtrober wrote:
interesting. What's wrong with the UI?
Sorry, this isn't UI school.
If you have to ask that question, that's where you need to go to understand what's wrong with it.
lol....I found no caddzooks UI school via google. Are you reading HOW TO 101 books and just woke up on the worng side of the bed this a.m.?
The UI isn't perfect, but it's very functional. Sure, some things could use tweaking, but if you can't answer a simple question perhaps you don't know the answer your self:
what's wrong with the UI (in your humble??? opinion)? / comments
caddzooks wrote:
avidtrober wrote:
interesting. What's wrong with the UI?
Sorry, this isn't UI school.
If you have to ask that question, that's where you need to go to understand what's...
caddzooks wrote:
avidtrober wrote:
caddzooks wrote:
Along the lines of HawkEye (http://www.acorns.com.au/Projects/Hawkeye), the ability to inject Reflector into a running .NET application or CLR host, and examine the loaded/running assemblies would be something I would consider paying for.
have you tried windbg, sos.dll, !SaveModule? You could script/wrapper it to make it automated. You'd pay hundreds for that?
What do any of those have in common with Reflector?
You can "examine the loaded/running assemblies" for one. Windbg and Visual Studio offer the means to attach to managed processes, and there are various ways to save off the modules in the target process for loading into .Net Reflector. i.e. you're paying hundreds for something that can already by done with existing tools.
caddzooks wrote:
Are we talking about debugging or browsing/disassembly ?
It sounds like both. And, both are already being done with existing tools. / comments
caddzooks wrote:
avidtrober wrote:
caddzooks wrote:
Along the lines of HawkEye (http://www.acorns.com.au/Projects/Hawkeye), the ability to inject Reflector into a running .NET application ...
It's obsufucated to protect the intellectual property.
It appears barely more than the UI is managed (.Net) while the rest is unmanaged, e.g. http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms404384.aspx.
I'm guessing the windbg debugger symbols APIs are used in order to know the exact variable names of assemblies. I've noticed it builds some name for the variables if the assemblies are not accessible. (But, I've never FileMon'd Reflector or debugged it to know for sure).
You can download Rotor, http://research.microsoft.com/sscli/, to see how many things work in the CLR.
It's pretty much (advanced) programming knowledge how to build a .Net Reflector. It's just too much of a pain to do it when .Net Reflector was free. If it starts costing, count on it, another free one will pop up. / comments
It's obsufucated to protect the intellectual property.
It appears barely more than the UI is managed (.Net) while the rest is unmanaged, e.g. http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms404384.aspx.
...
caddzooks wrote:
Along the lines of HawkEye (http://www.acorns.com.au/Projects/Hawkeye), the ability to inject Reflector into a running .NET application or CLR host, and examine the loaded/running assemblies would be something I would consider paying for.
have you tried windbg, sos.dll, !SaveModule? You could script/wrapper it to make it automated. You'd pay hundreds for that? / comments
caddzooks wrote:
Along the lines of HawkEye (http://www.acorns.com.au/Projects/Hawkeye), the ability to inject Reflector into a running .NET application or CLR host, and examine the loaded/runni...
avidtrober wrote:
It's takes a weekend to show how to use a V-pattern and break down the IL into statements so that you can put it in any language you want it in. Enough of a pain to not do it yourself, but not enough to just roll your own vs. someone asking for money.
ECMA 335 + unmanage reflection APIs (the managed are just wrappers, but not one-to-one) + V-pattern + statement-to-language = open source.
Any fancy features beyond that are winforms-provided.
Lutz may sold because who else would buy it???
Don't worry, you won't lose free .Net reflection with pretty much the same features as provided now, maybe even better ones, because there are plenty of unfinished-to-shelved projects lying around. / comments
avidtrober wrote:
It's takes a weekend to show how to use a V-pattern and break down the IL into statements so that you can put it in any language you want it in. Enough of a pain to not do it ...
caddzooks wrote:
Most of us are skeptical because many of us do not see Reflector as a viable commercial venture
Which leads one to be skeptical as to why buy it? :-)
caddzooks wrote:
Therefore, my guess is that since Lutz sold out on us, and you paid him for Reflector, once you realize that there is little room for a commercial version of it alongside the free or 'community' version, we will eventually see you tell us something like: "well, that was the plan at that moment".
And, out comes (perhaps dozens and dozens?) open source HOW TO publications.
caddzooks wrote:
Aside from fixing the lousy UI Reflector has (something that most of us tolerate and do not care about all that much),
interesting. What's wrong with the UI?
it's the add-on architecture that's poor. And, the "must upgrade or I delete myself" I can't stand.
caddzooks wrote:
I don't know what else you can do to make a commercial version of it, that can effectively compete with a free version that is so feature laden.
Does someone have a lot of money they don't know what to do with? Or, just unaware of what's available on a worldwide web basis (or certainly will be) with this move.
caddzooks wrote:
So, I think what most here need to pay attention to is your first sentence: 'Our plan the moment', and that the 'moment' will not last long.
It's takes a weekend to show how to use a V-pattern and break down the IL into statements so that you can put it in any language you want it in. Enough of a pain to not do it yourself, but not enough to just roll your own vs. someone asking for money. / comments
caddzooks wrote:
Most of us are skeptical because many of us do not see Reflector as a viable commercial venture
Which leads one to be skeptical as to why buy it? :-)
caddzooks wrote:
Theref...
Don't worry about them taking away current features. If they do, open source versions will pop up. It's not that hard to disassemble and format the code to IL, C# or VB.NET. Just enough of a pain that it's better to download .Net Reflector. If features go away, you'll see numerous HOW TO publications with complete functionality. / comments
Don't worry about them taking away current features. If they do, open source versions will pop up. It's not that hard to disassemble and format the code to IL, C# or VB.NET. Just enough of a pai...