RE: [Dev-C++] C#

[Hongli L. <h....@ch...>]

So C# doesn't differ much from Java? The hype is even bigger than I
thought. The Microsoft fanboys say "I can hear Java 2 developers crying
already because .NET and C# will blow them away"...


On Mon, 2002-07-01 at 18:24, Ioannis Vranos wrote:
> 
> Lets start by explaining what .NET is. .NET is a framework which has a
> Just In-Time Compiler like Java Virtual Machine named Common Language
> Runtime. When you create programs and compile them, they are "compiled"
> to some intermediate bytecode called "Intermediate Language". When you
> execute the program, the program is compiled at run time by the CLR
> engine and then it is executed. The main difference with JVM, is that
> JVM supports only Java while CLR is open to support any language (and so
> different languages can interoperate).
> 
> .NET provides an API for the CLR which the various languages can use so
> as to write programs, and interoperate with one another. C# is a C-style
> language (which is another matter of discussion how much C-style is, it
> resembles Pascal too) which is restricted entirely to the abilities of
> the CLR.
> 
> 
> The ideal in programming is to write portable efficient code with the
> system dependencies encapsulated in a small portion of the code only. In
> the view of .NET, if you want to make your code able to be used by other
> .NET languages, you can create a .NET interface to it.
> 
> 
> The question if C++ is going to be widely used now that C# has arrived
> is a joke, not because of language fanatism but of reality.
> C# is not a system programming language. You can not write an Operating
> System with it, it is a simple language among others in the .NET world.
> You cannot do advanced tasks with it.
> 
> 
> .NET, the entire Visual Studio 7 (including the C# compiler), 6 etc, MS
> Office, Internet Explorer, Netscape, Microsoft Windows, Virtual Java
> Machine, etc are *ALL WRITTEN IN C++*. This is natural, it could not be
> done another way.
> 
> 
> You can write a C# compiler with C++ but you can't write a C++ compiler
> with C#.
> 
> This is because C# and C++ design aims are different. C++ is made with a
> bias for systems programming (to write OSes etc) with design aims for
> writing programs with the maximum space/time efficiency possible, while
> C# design aims is to write simple applications.
> 
> 
> Also C# is not a normally standardised language, so you cannot find
> compiler for it at every system (from water machines to large
> mainframes). On the other hand C++ is openly standardised and you can
> find a compiler of it *everywhere*, and this will be happening also in
> the future (consider for example HTML, etc and other open standards,
> they will be always supported).
> C# also supports only Object Oriented programming and this not
> completely (it doesn't support multiple inheritance etc). If you want to
> write a hello world program in C# you have to create a class.
> 
> 
> This is the truth, i am not a language fanatic and probably i 'll learn
> C# in the future too (which will be very easy after C++, since their
> abilities are a subset) as also Java etc.
> 
> 
> There is much hype around C# because MS wants to lock in programmers.
> The same happens for SUN's Java, Borland's Delphi and other
> non-standardised languages.
> 
> 
> Read the following interesting article about silver bullets (the above
> languages are advertised as panaceas):
> 
> 
> http://www.itworld.com/AppDev/710/lw-02-stroustrup/
>