Linked by Eugenia Loli on Thu 24th May 2007 20:59 UTC
OSNews, Generic OSes "Those in search of eternal life need look no further than the computer industry. Here, last gasps are rarely taken, as aging systems crank away in back rooms across the U.S., not unlike 1970s reruns on Nickelodeon's TV Land. So while it may not be exactly easy for Novell NetWare engineers and OS/2 administrators to find employers who require their services, it's very difficult to declare these skills -- or any computer skill, really -- dead." My Take: "C" dying should have been "x86 Assembly".
Permalink for comment 243050
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: C dead?
by Simba on Fri 25th May 2007 09:32 UTC in reply to "RE: C dead?"
Member since:

> Furthermore, if you're a Windows developer, then
> .Net has indeed changed the world. For the better.
> I haven't written a single line of VB6 or unmanaged
> C++ in years, and hope to never have to again.

Which is fine, as long as you do not have to write applications to run on older hardware, and do not care about cross platform capability at all.

When it comes to older hardware, .NET has all the problems that Java has. It uses too much memory, it loads classes dynamically at runtime when they are needed (which is slow in general), etc.

When it comes to cross platform capability, Java clearly kicks C#'s ass.

So basically, for me, I use Java when absolute speed / performance doesn't matter, or when I don't have to worry about supporting older hardware. Otherwise I use C. I have no use for C# (Windows only for all practical purposes, since mono will never be fully compatible). I also have no use for C++, since it doesn't offer me anything that C or Java doesn't. C++ is basically an example of how NOT to write an OOP language.

Reply Parent Score: 2