“Hello! I am a developer. Here is my relevant experience: I code in Hoobijag and sometimes jabbernocks and of course ABCDE++++ (but never ABCDE+/^+ are you kidding? ha!) and I like working with Shoobababoo and occasionally kleptomitrons. I’ve gotten to work for Company1 doing Shoobaboo-ing code things and that’s what led me to the Snarfus. So, let’s dive in!
I think your tutorial depends too much on your editor UI. It reminds me of those tutorials (often written by Microsoft) where the IDE has changed enough to break the tutorial. This made the tutorial completely useless, because none of them would explain what I actually needed: the magic thing their IDE did in terms of essentials (text files, basic commands), so I could reproduce the effect.
This is different in the unix world, which favors tool-agnostic approaches in terms of text files & basic commands. Even as tooling & technology changes, I can usually look up the meaning of the text & those commands to update them.
That’s the most important I think: not the answer itself, but where the answer comes from, so I can go back there when I need to.
You mean the UI which is specified in the pre-requisites, that UI? 😂 It’s not a bug, it’s a feature - no bloat from going through everything twice (once for VS, once for VS Code). That’s why it’s in the pre-requisites.
You know I needed to write this because Microsoft hasn’t written a tutorial for this topic, at all, right? That does remind me though, MAUI have changed the parameters for Grids - I better check that part of my tutorial is still valid.
It’s a bad one: if I’m unable to get that version of your IDE, the tutorial becomes useless. If it had stuck to programming essentials like the source code & configuration files, then it’d have enduring value as the reader could understand without unnecessary concealment of basic information dependent on an IDE.
Not implied: the tutorial would properly focus on the programming without IDE complications as it shows the files generated & dependencies linked. (eg, “I did this in my IDE: here’s what it did”.) The reader could in principle use any text editor. It’s not an IDE tutorial.
And you made another Microsoft-grade tutorial: that’s not a compliment.
No it doesn’t. Clicking on the link gives you the latest version, which obviously is above the minimum version.
Haven’t concealed anything - it’s there in the pre-requisites
I have many screenshots showing exactly that.
No they can’t. Several times I cover the Intellisense options which make it easy. This isn’t available in a text editor, hence the pre-requisite of using Visual Studio if you want to follow this blog.
It’s not meant to be. It covers what you need to know to do what I have done in the blog.
Nope! They don’t include pre-requisites at all, never mind links to them, never mind step-by-step processes with screenshots, etc.