Linked by David Adams on Wed 1st Oct 2008 14:32 UTC
Microsoft's leader of C# development, writer of the Turbo Pascal system, and lead architect on the Delphi language, Anders Hejlsberg, reveals all there is to know on the history, inspiration, uses and future direction of one of computer programming's most widely used languages - C#. Hejlsberg also offers some insight into the upcoming version of C# (C#4) and the new language F#, as well as what lies ahead in the world of functional programming.
Thread beginning with comment 332087
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-07-05
Member since:2006-01-01
I certainly hope not. In my opinion, using ASP.NET & C# for web sites is only slightly more elegant than creating web sites in FrontPage.
Well, no. ASP.NET is pretty good - certainly no worse than JSP or PHP. The benefit of ASP.NET is that it allows real RAD design (Okay, I love absolute positioning, so sue me!) and the potential code reuse of a properly designed engine between a desktop and web app is extremely productive (okay, Java has this too, but hey!.)
ASP.NET has a bad rap, because those who are clueless think "ASP" is an element of the ASP.NET runtime. Well, no, it isn't at all like that. Comparing ASP to ASP.NET is like comparing a Instant coffee to premium ground.
Member since:2005-07-06
Who is claiming that cloning your existing programs with C# is a good idea?
Errr, Microsoft. I take it you haven't read any editions of MSDN magazine or don't know how Microsoft is selling .Net? The whole Winforms -> Avalon/WPF stuff is an absolute classic example. Oh, just re-write your code in this technology.
You now have .NET and C# as an superior alternative to C++ and VB, simply use it if you want.
Unfortunately, there is a great deal of existing code around. There's not an awful lot of new stuff being written, and it's just a pity that the upgrade path, particularly for VB -> VB.Net is non-existent. People want to take their existing code and upgrade it into something new with no rewrites.
The statement you've written there means nothing.
Such broad claims will always prove false. Anyway, web applications may very well mean ASP.NET and C#.
Unfortunately, it's true. .Net adoption just simply isn't that fantastic due to vast amounts of legacy code, and the fact that it is a moving target (Winform, WPF etc. etc.), and there's really no reason to use ASP.Net. They're just competing with everyone else out there doing web application frameworks, and they're not doing anything on the client that is helping their customers or users from a backward compatibility point of view.
What's the deal if not someone else is not using C# to program core parts of Windows?
Because it doesn't inspire confidence. Microsoft are telling everyone to use .Net when their internal usage and their usage for their own applications is non-existent.
Really, I didn't think that concept needed explaining.
If you just don't like this programming language or the company behind it, just say so. Less noise.
Translation: Blah, blah, blah, you're being anti-Microsoft, wah, wah.
If you don't understand this, I'd advise reading Joel Spolsky's pretty spot on piece:
http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/APIWar.html
Member since:
2005-07-06
Who is claiming that cloning your existing programs with C# is a good idea? You now have .NET and C# as an superior alternative to C++ and VB, simply use it if you want.
Such broad claims will always prove false. Anyway, web applications may very well mean ASP.NET and C#.
Then why should anyone else use it? "
What's the deal if not someone else is not using C# to program core parts of Windows?
If you just don't like this programming language or the company behind it, just say so. Less noise.