Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 13th Dec 2010 19:27 UTC, submitted by lemur2
Mono Project For the most time, I've been firmly in the largest camp when it comes to the Mono debate - the 'I don't care'-camp. With patent lawsuits being hotter than Lady Gaga right now, that changed. For good reason, so it seems; while firmly in the 'ZOMG-MICROSOFT-IS-T3H-EVILL!1!!ONE!'-camp, The-Source.com investigated the five most popular Mono applications, and the conclusion is clear: all of them implement a lot of namespaces which are not covered by Microsoft's community promise thing.
Thread beginning with comment 453357
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Evil Companies
by vivainio on Mon 13th Dec 2010 21:05 UTC in reply to "Evil Companies"
vivainio
Member since:
2008-12-26


Maybe the only real alternative for a modern/fast/efficient/open/OO language is D.


Have you heard of this C++ thing? Almost all the software you run is written in it, and it's neither encumbered nor irrelevant.

Reply Parent Score: 13

RE[2]: Evil Companies
by Zifre on Mon 13th Dec 2010 22:35 in reply to "RE: Evil Companies"
Zifre Member since:
2009-10-04

Have you heard of this C++ thing? Almost all the software you run is written in it

No, actually very little software on a typical Linux desktop is written in C++. KDE is the largest user, and most distros default to GNOME.

and it's neither encumbered nor irrelevant.

Yes, but I think it fails the "modern" requirement. C++ is better than C, but there are so many thing it got wrong that it's not even worth discussing (although there are a lot of things that I like very much about C++). There's also the fact that a lot of people are going to want a pointer-less language with fast, precise garbage collection. You can argue all you want, but it can hardly be argued that a good, open-source, unencumbered, fast, modern, GC-ed, OO language would not increase development for Linux.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: Evil Companies
by lemur2 on Mon 13th Dec 2010 22:45 in reply to "RE[2]: Evil Companies"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

"Have you heard of this C++ thing? Almost all the software you run is written in it
No, actually very little software on a typical Linux desktop is written in C++. KDE is the largest user, and most distros default to GNOME. "

Of the top 10 distributions on Distrowatch:
1 Ubuntu GNOME
2 Fedora GNOME
3 Mint GNOME
4 openSUSE KDE
5 Debian GNOME
6 Sabayon KDE
7 PCLinuxOS KDE
8 Arch agnostic
9 Mandriva KDE
10 Puppy agnostic

... it is 4 each for GNOME and KDE by default. Arch does not have a default, and Puppy's default is neither GNOME nor KDE. Ubuntu, Fedora, Debian and even Mint have KDE variants, and Sabayon, openSuSe and PCLinuxOS have GNOME variants (not sure about Mandriva).

"and it's neither encumbered nor irrelevant.
Yes, but I think it fails the "modern" requirement. C++ is better than C, but there are so many thing it got wrong that it's not even worth discussing (although there are a lot of things that I like very much about C++). There's also the fact that a lot of people are going to want a pointer-less language with fast, precise garbage collection. You can argue all you want, but it can hardly be argued that a good, open-source, unencumbered, fast, modern, GC-ed, OO language would not increase development for Linux. "

garbage collection, unencumbered, fast, modern, GC-ed, OO language - D ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D_%28programming_language%29

It still has pointers, but there is a "safe" subset.

AFAIK it can use the IDEs, debuggers, libraries and bindings for C and most of C++.

Edited 2010-12-13 22:54 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Evil Companies
by vivainio on Tue 14th Dec 2010 05:44 in reply to "RE[2]: Evil Companies"
vivainio Member since:
2008-12-26


No, actually very little software on a typical Linux desktop is written in C++.


By volume of code, not true. Openoffice, browsers... are written in C++. It doesn't matter much if my clock applet is written in C.

Yes, but I think it fails the "modern" requirement. C++ is better than C, but there are so many thing it got wrong that it's not even worth discussing (although there are a lot of things that I like very much about C++).



KDE is the largest user, and most distros default to GNOME.

and it's neither encumbered nor irrelevant.

C++ is "good enough", esp. when you use Qt framework. I don't see huge advantages with using C#; notably, Qt does memory management for you so GC is no biggie. Closures would be nice to have, but we will have them in c++0x.

I believe managed languages mostly belong to server side.

You can argue all you want, but it can hardly be argued that a good, open-source, unencumbered, fast, modern, GC-ed, OO language would not increase development for Linux.


Again, developers picking up Qt would increase development more than yet another new language that remains fashionable for a while, without ever growing to commercial relevance.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: Evil Companies
by Tuishimi on Tue 14th Dec 2010 12:14 in reply to "RE[2]: Evil Companies"
Tuishimi Member since:
2005-07-06

Screw C++, D and all these OOP languages... give me a good implementation of FORTRAN and I'll mop the floor with them...

(LOL)

Reply Parent Score: 2