Hello once again. I am gonna end the argument about Linux vs Windows. Yes, I do like Linux and respect Linux I was just making the statement that it''s not for business or a newbie at all. CobraA1 I respect your opinion about Linux, which everything you say in the world wouldn''t change my opinion that Linux is for newbies or for business practice like Windows even if every game programmer changed to the OS. But that''s why it''s an opinion, right? Now this thing on C#, I must say I do not know anything about this new language except it''s going to replace J++ in the new Visual Studios. Does anyone know where I can get information about the new language and the features?
braves

I didn''t mean to put my post twice.....how can I delete the first post?
braves

To delete a post, try to edit it. It should have a checkbox to delete the post.

I think an open-source GNU C# is very unlikely. C# is designed for Windows. If it was ported to Linux\UNIX then certain features (i.e most of them as the language depends on windows) and you would be left with some crusty version of C# that is just like C++ except for pointless, powerless, and their "flexible" is just a joke. No, I think that MS will protect C# even more than Sun protect their Java.

Im getting tired of MS ''innovations (they really stole or bought from someone)''.

-----------------------------

A wise man once said "A person with half a clue is more dangerous than a person with or without one."

quote: Original post by Lucasdg

Back to C#. How can anyone say its not trying to ''replace'' a language. It is portrayed as a webbier, snazzier C++ which is a huge improvement over C++, getting rid of ''annoying'' things such as having to deal with ->, ::, ., and pointers, and templates. Not to mention mulitple inheritance. There goes my plan to make a mermaid by deriving a class ''MERMAID'' from ''FISH'' and ''WOMAN''!!!!

When I call MERMAID::Respire(), does it use the gills or the lungs? Ah, the perils of MI

Seriously though... I don''t agree with your take on the way they''re pitching C#. I don''t believe it''s a replacement for C++ at all. Rather, I think C# is to C++ what VBScript is to Visual Basic. They are trying to leverage existing programmers who will be familiar with the syntax towards one of their products, but most importantly away from Java. I believe they fully expect C# and C++ to both continue for separate purposes, hopefully squeezing out Java between them. Nobody will be writing device drivers in C# for a while, that''s for sure

quote:
SIMPLE - A tradeoff for power. SIMPLE as that. Simple means easy, intuitive, and nice. Simple also means incomplex, and a big power-tradeoff. Less power is what SIMPLE means to me.

It -could- do. But C is simple compared to assembly, but I don''t think there is much less power there. You could argue that there is more power.

quote:
This is a quote from "Presenting C#":
"Contributing to the ease of use is the elimination of certain features of C++: no more macros, no templates, and no multiple inheritance. The aforementioned features create more problems than they provide benefit—especially for enterprise developers."

More trouble than its worth they reckon? Hmm... I must disagree. Strongly, in fact.

Agreed. The template -implementation- is often awkward (wow, 7-line compilation error messages!) but generic programming cannot be said to create more problems than it provides benefits for!

you''re damn right man. C# is nothing more than a diluated damn mixure of C++ and poor VB.
no serious programmer will learn this shit. i''ve nothing against microsoft but i think C# is the microsoft''s answer to java. and the big deal for microsoft with this C# is the (C) copyright. yet another microsoft propietary great language.
i hate those easy-to-learn language like VB. this kinda languages are always ineficient.

adriand76@yahoo.com
www.adriand76.8m.com <-- i''ve a java tetris game there
email me if you want the source code

[qoute]
It -could- do. But C is simple compared to assembly, but I don''t think there is much less power there. You could argue that there is more power.
[/qoute]

There is less power in C than assembly, but not much less because there is extremely little absraction from the hardware, in fact, you can probably figure out what the compiler will make your keywords into. However, you can never argue there is more power in a higher level language. There might be less development time, but everything in the end is really the same thing, so if you tried to argue about power, you''d get laughed at pretty fast.

-----------------------------

A wise man once said "A person with half a clue is more dangerous than a person with or without one."

So, C# ends up being another attempt to make everything work only on Windows . . . I really hoped that a new language would be more than that. They make everything easy & simple, but the catch is that it can only work on their propriety OS. This is one of the reasons why I avoid DirectX. Since it''s only for Windows, that makes it next to impossible to make it for Linux, one of the platforms I hope to create programs for.


"If a man does not keep pace with his companions, perhaps it is because he hears a different drummer. Let him step to the music he hears, however measured or far away" --Henry David Thoreau

quote: Original post by ChaosEngine

I think there''s an important point here that a lot of people are missing.
C++ - non-proprietary language
Java/C# - owned by SUN/MS
Don''t even think about telling me Java is open standard. If so why were MS told not use the word "Java" in the IDE and then when they used J++ told not to use even "J"!

I''ll answer this. Because Java is owned by Sun, and licensed out by them. They license ports that meet their standards, thus cross-platform compatible being one. MS added too many MFC specific items into J(ava)++ and thus didn''t meet the compatibility requirements that SUN set forth. They revoked the license and MS kept using J in the name and said it was Java compatible, thus they were sued by SUN for copyright infringement. Simple to understand if you ask me.
Basically MS couldn''t take somebody else''s stuff and twist it, so they made their own variant, renamed and repackaged it, and made it very reliant on other MS technologies.



BeS
It's Da BOMB Baby!!!