Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 10th Sep 2005 19:26 UTC
Mono Project "We consider Mono 1.1.9 stable enough to recommend it for all users. Those upgrading from the 1.0.x series should note that these notes only contain the differences between 1.1.8 and 1.1.9."
Permalink for comment 29431
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Boo Programming Language
by segedunum on Sun 11th Sep 2005 00:50 UTC in reply to "Boo Programming Language"
Member since:

For everyone who thinks that Mono/.NET equates to C#, I'd like you to check out the Boo programming language at

Which is just C# with additional bits bunged on and some syntactic changes, so it really is C# after all. If you don't believe me, look at this:

That's what all these .Net/Mono languages come down to - "that equals that and this equals this in C#".

That's just one part of the idiocy I find with .Net and the meaningless hype - language neutrality. All .Net languages when it all boils down to it have to be translated to IL and use the .Net framework and as such, all languages like C#, VB.Net, Boo and Nemerle can be are absolutely identical languages with some syntactic changes and some hyped added features which do not make the language unique in the slightest. Many people are going to squirm like crazy over that, but that's what languages like Boo and Nemerle boil down to. And before anyone says "Oh, but lots of people are familiar with VB, Python, blah, blah, blah" the fact is that VB.Net is not VB at all, and in porting Python or any other language, at some stage you have to tie that syntax to IL and run it within a CLR. Anybody who's worked on these things will tell you that all that will be produced is a .Net language, and nothing that you will have been familiar with before. A language is more than just mere syntax. That's the simple reason why Python and PERL for .Net have died a death and why many VB.Net developers are questioning why they are using VB at all when .Net is clearly designed for C# and they can't re-use their existing language skills anyway.

Because of that, having a choice of languages is totally pointless because in order to co-exist totally within the same environment (.Net framework, the CLR and IL) they have lost any reason for any programmer to use a different language - the fact that they are different! Look at Visual C++ and classic Visual Basic. They were both very different and used for different purposes, and they could certainly co-exist to a certain point, but each had a clearly defined use.

Not so with any .Net language. The only differences people come up with are "this syntax is equal to this in C#" and "we've effectively bunged all of this into a macro so you can magically appear to write x% less code(tm) but it still doesn't make the language unique in the slightest". The acid test is "can you port all of those features to C# tomorrow with no effort?". The answer, is of course, yes. If that's all there is then there simply aren't any different langauges at all in the .Net world. Cue the usual .Net fanboy squirming ;-).

Reply Parent Score: -5