Author Topic: C# .net  (Read 3361 times)

Pathos

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 518
  • Kudos: 416
Re: C# .net
« Reply #15 on: 21 January 2006, 08:38 »
I've used .Net a bit and I haven't found anything inovative about it in comparision to java. java itself isn't very innovative either, just another imperative language with a c++ syntax and inbuilt object handling. with each new release they seem to add a bit more C++ because they realise there was a point in having it (eg enums , "generics" aka templates)

Everything in .Net could have been done with C++.

The ,Net IDE on the other hand is the best in the world for coding effieciency. .Net dramatically reduces coding time. It is the fastest way of building a gui based application.

Its not the language that attracts the industry its the tools and api and most importantly the improved productivity.

The next language I hope becomes industry standard is D. The best of C++ as well as the code effiecency of modern OO languages. but it probably wont happen because the changes are quite minor and more a fancy than anything else.

mobrien_12

  • VIP
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,138
  • Kudos: 711
    • http://www.geocities.com/mobrien_12
Re: C# .net
« Reply #16 on: 22 January 2006, 01:32 »
Quote from: cymon
There are free implementations of UNIX, but SCO owns the trademark, does that mean that all unix systems are shit?


Dammit, another one who has been listening to and believing SCO's crap instead of researching it.

SCO does not own the trademark to UNIX.  SCO does not "own the Unix operating system" as they like to say.

The UNIX trademark is owned by the Open Group.  When Novell got out of the Unix business, they sold the business aspect, OpenServer, and Unixware to the Santa Cruz Operation.  If the Santa Cruz Operation licenced System V code, 100% of the royalties were to be paid back to Novell, and Novell would remitt 5% back to Santa Cruz Operation as an administrative fee.

Novell specifically and explicitly retained all copyrights.  There has been no transfer of copyright agreement between Novell and Santa Cruz Operation (which is now called Tarantella) and the company which calls itself SCO (the letters of which stand for nothing), which used to be a big linux vendor called Caldera.

Novell turned the specs and trademark over to the Open Group.

There are no "free implementatins of UNIX," except maybe for OpenSolaris (not sure about that one) which doesn't fully exist yet.

Linux is not UNIX.  OSX is not UNIX.  FreeBSD isn't even UNIX.  For something to be UNIX, it must meet the standards of the Open Group. It must be submitted for a lengthy and expensive review process by the Open Group.  It does not have to have any code base requirements to do this.  There is at least one official UNIX which was written from scratch and has no System V code in it at all.

For some reason, the Open Group has allowed SCO to run around saying they own everything in the world with the only action taken being a couple of letters backed by no lawsuits.
In brightest day, in darkest night, no evil shall escape my sight....

mobrien_12

  • VIP
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,138
  • Kudos: 711
    • http://www.geocities.com/mobrien_12
Re: C# .net
« Reply #17 on: 22 January 2006, 06:16 »
I still don't understand what this is supposed to accomplish beyond the Mono project.
In brightest day, in darkest night, no evil shall escape my sight....

_kill__bill

  • VIP
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 224
  • Kudos: 355
Re: C# .net
« Reply #18 on: 23 January 2006, 15:55 »
The Mono project looks intresting. However, Microsoft still has de facto control of the C# and .NET standards, even if they submitted it to ECMA. Since .NET was designed for Winshit, it will not ever be 100% reliable on *ix|*BSD systems.

Besides, there are still some deficiencies in the language. Nice IDE, though. I'll have to make one for Theta  :(

Under no circumstances will I allow Microshit to maintain control of the languages. We need to hit them on all fronts, all at once. I'm personally targeting C# and the semi-MS-controlled C++. (yes, the C++ language is almost all free, but many of the libraries for the Windows platform are completely f---ed up by them)

Theta will handle all the deficiencies in C++ / C# while freeing them from enemy control.

I'd finish the point I'm making, but my battery is about to go.
Long Live the Revolution!

piratePenguin

  • VIP
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3,027
  • Kudos: 775
    • http://piratepenguin.is-a-geek.com/~declan/
Re: C# .net
« Reply #19 on: 23 January 2006, 16:07 »
When will you register the SF project and/or start coding? Once you have some (nice) code written it might be easier to attract developers.
"What you share with the world is what it keeps of you."
 - Noah And The Whale: Give a little love



a poem by my computer, Macintosh Vigilante
Macintosh amends a damned around the requested typewriter. Macintosh urges a scarce design. Macintosh postulates an autobiography. Macintosh tolls the solo variant. Why does a winter audience delay macintosh? The maker tosses macintosh. Beneath female suffers a double scum. How will a rat cube the heavier cricket? Macintosh calls a method. Can macintosh nest opposite the headache? Macintosh ties the wrong fairy. When can macintosh stem the land gang? Female aborts underneath macintosh. Inside macintosh waffles female. Next to macintosh worries a well.

Pathos

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 518
  • Kudos: 416
Re: C# .net
« Reply #20 on: 24 January 2006, 10:46 »
I don't think you will find many developers for this...it really seems like a waste of time.  I don't think you need to build a new language to hijack the .Net framework. The language D cleans up C++ and C# already.

Microsoft has control because OSS don't care because you're average OSS professional programmer prefers C/ C++ and doesn't have to put up with mircosofts shit api's. The reason they are so shit is because win95 was built when MS didn't know about C++ and OO programming. They have been adding more C++ into their new libraries as they go and made a bit of a hash of it.

on the other hand from my limited knowledge the linux ones are all C and consistently structured.

I can understand if you're doing this for intellectural investigation but to say you're targeting the microsoft .Net to wrestle MS's control over is just ....

_kill__bill

  • VIP
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 224
  • Kudos: 355
Re: C# .net
« Reply #21 on: 26 January 2006, 17:16 »
It may be a slight waste of time, but D doesn't seem to be going anywhere. Besides, MS has control of the OS market (right now, at least). If you want your software to be used except by the fringe, it needs to support Winshit. The way to go is to support Win32 and Linux, so switching is easier. Theta theoretically will compile the same source on every platform. Hopefully it will do better at that than C++.

Anyways, Theta now has a website/host/whatever at sourceforge as theta-language.
Long Live the Revolution!

Pathos

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 518
  • Kudos: 416
Re: C# .net
« Reply #22 on: 27 January 2006, 06:23 »
C++ compiles perfectly on both platforms.

Its not the language but the API's that have to be multiplatform. And you can make good multiplatform programs with C++: the gimp, firefox, gaim etc

So um how is theta supposed to use the .NET api? are you going to rewrite it for linux? Use the mono project?

Master of Reality

  • VIP
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4,249
  • Kudos: 177
    • http://www.bobhub.tk
Re: C# .net
« Reply #23 on: 27 January 2006, 16:25 »
i think he just wants to copy .NET CLR (and use his own language copied from C++/C#/Java)... which is copied from Java JRE.... so its going to be a copy of a copy?

This didnt really mean to sound so condescending, but there is already the mono implementation of the .NET framework, there is already Java for multiplatform support.
Disorder | Rating
Paranoid: Moderate
Schizoid: Moderate
Linux User #283518
'It takes more than a self-inflicted gunshot wound to the head to stop Bob'

_kill__bill

  • VIP
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 224
  • Kudos: 355
Re: C# .net
« Reply #24 on: 3 February 2006, 21:12 »
It uses something like the .NET platform, not the actual Microsoft system.

Yes, C++ compiles perfectly on everything. It's the API's that are screwed beyond belief.
Long Live the Revolution!