这绝对是主观的，但我想尽量避免它变成争论。我认为如果人们恰当地对待它，这将是一个有趣的问题。
这个问题的想法来自于我对“你最讨厌的语言的哪五件事?”问题的回答。我认为c#中的类在默认情况下应该是密封的——我不会把我的理由放在这个问题上，但我可能会写一个更完整的解释来回答这个问题。我对评论中的讨论热度感到惊讶(目前有25条评论)。
那么，你有什么有争议的观点?我宁愿避免那些基于相对较少的基础而导致相当宗教的事情(例如，大括号放置)，但例如可能包括“单元测试实际上并没有多大帮助”或“公共字段确实是可以的”之类的事情。重要的是(至少对我来说)你的观点背后是有理由的。
请提出你的观点和理由——我鼓励人们投票给那些有充分论证和有趣的观点，不管你是否恰好同意这些观点。
当前回答
I work in ASP.NET / VB.NET a lot and find ViewState an absolute nightmare. It's enabled by default on the majority of fields and causes a large quantity of encoded data at the start of every web page. The bigger a page gets in terms of controls on a page, the larger the ViewState data will become. Most people don't turn an eye to it, but it creates a large set of data which is usually irrelevant to the tasks being carried on the page. You must manually disable this option on all ASP controls if they're not being used. It's either that or have custom controls for everything.
在我使用的一些页面上，页面的一半是由ViewState组成的，这真的很遗憾，因为可能有更好的方法来做到这一点。
这只是我在语言/技术观点方面能想到的一个小例子。这可能会引起争议。
顺便说一下，你可能想在这个帖子上编辑投票，它可能会被一些人热得很;)
其他回答
如果一种编程语言的语法不直观，我也不在乎它有多强大，而且我不能把它放在一边，在不花太多精力刷新细节的情况下再回来使用它。我宁愿语言本身是直观的，而不是神秘但强大的用于创建DSL。计算机语言对我来说是一种用户界面，我希望它像任何其他用户界面一样易于使用。
开发团队应该更多地按照技术/架构层而不是业务功能来划分。
我来自一个开发者拥有“从网页到存储过程的一切”的普遍文化。因此，为了在系统/应用程序中实现一个功能，他们将准备数据库表模式，编写存储procs，匹配数据访问代码，实现业务逻辑和web服务方法，以及web页面接口。
And guess what? Everybody has their own way to doing things! Everyone struggles to learn the ASP.NET AJAX and Telerik or Infragistic suites, Enterprise Library or other productivity and data layer and persistence frameworks, Aspect-oriented frameworks, logging and caching application blocks, DB2 or Oracle percularities. And guess what? Everybody takes heck of a long time to learn how to do things the proper way! Meaning, lots of mistakes in the meantime and plenty of resulting defects and performance bottlenecks! And heck of a longer time to fix them! Across each and every layer! Everybody has a hand in every Visual Studio project. Nobody is specialised to handle and optmise one problem/technology domain. Too many chefs spoil the soup. All the chefs result in some radioactive goo.
Developers may have cross-layer/domain responsibilities, but they should not pretend that they can be masters of all disciplines, and should be limited to only a few. In my experience, when a project is not a small one and utilises lots of technologies, covering more business functions in a single layer is more productive (as well as encouraging more test code test that layer) than covering less business functions spanning the entire architectural stack (which motivates developers to test only via their UI and not test code).
观点:数据驱动的设计本末倒置。它应该立即从我们的思想中消除。
绝大多数软件不是关于数据的，而是关于我们试图为客户解决的业务问题。它是关于一个问题域的，涉及对象、规则、流程、案例和关系。
当我们从数据开始设计，并根据数据和数据之间的关系(表、外键和x-to-x关系)对系统的其余部分建模时，我们将整个应用程序限制为如何在数据库中存储数据和如何从数据库中检索数据。此外，我们将数据库体系结构公开给软件。
数据库模式是一个实现细节。我们应该可以自由地改变它，而不需要对我们的软件设计进行任何显著的改变。业务层不应该知道表是如何设置的，或者是从视图中提取还是从表中提取，或者是从动态SQL或存储过程中获取表。这种类型的代码永远不应该出现在表示层中。
软件是用来解决业务问题的。我们要处理用户、汽车、帐户、余额、平均值、摘要、转账、动物、消息、包裹、购物车、订单和其他各种真实的有形对象，以及我们可以对它们执行的操作。我们需要根据需要保存、加载、更新、查找和删除这些项。有时候，我们必须以特殊的方式来做这些事情。
But there's no real compelling reason that we should take the work that should be done in the database and move it away from the data and put it in the source code, potentially on a separate machine (introducing network traffic and degrading performance). Doing so means turning our backs on the decades of work that has already been done to improve the performance of stored procedures and functions built into databases. The argument that stored procedures introduce "yet another API" to be manged is specious: of course it does; that API is a facade that shields you from the database schema, including the intricate details of primary and foreign keys, transactions, cursors, and so on, and it prevents you from having to splice SQL together in your source code.
把马放回马车前面。思考问题领域，并围绕它设计解决方案。然后，从问题域导出数据。
我不明白为什么人们认为Java绝对是大学里最好的“首选”编程语言。
首先，我认为第一种编程语言应该强调学习控制流和变量的必要性，而不是对象和语法
另一方面，我相信没有在C / c++中调试内存泄漏经验的人无法完全理解Java带来的好处。
同样，自然的进展应该是从“我怎么能做这个”到“我怎么能找到做那个的库”，而不是相反。
Having a process that involves code being approved before it is merged onto the main line is a terrible idea. It breeds insecurity and laziness in developers, who, if they knew they could be screwing up dozens of people would be very careful about the changes they make, get lulled into a sense of not having to think about all the possible clients of the code they may be affecting. The person going over the code is less likely to have thought about it as much as the person writing it, so it can actually lead to poorer quality code being checked in... though, yes, it will probably follow all the style guidelines and be well commented :)
