Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft's New Language
We've been buried in submissions about Microsoft's new programming language. Here's one of them. Brohamm writes: "Microsoft has created a new language called c# (pronounced C-Sharp). It's supposed to look like C but has the same concepts as Java. Looks like they gave those J++ developers something to do. Check it out at CNet."
Do we have a link for "C#" yet? If you search for "C#" with the main Microsoft search engine, all the hits are irrelevant, as you'd expect.
Take it from a Visual Basic programmer. The models are too far apart. Theoretically, if VB can compile to its own p-code, it can compile to Java bytecode. But the resulting executable would simply blow goats. VB always was, and always will be, a Windows-only development tool. This has allowed MS to highly optimize VB for Windows. It's not meant to be portable.
Besides, Microsoft is leaning more toward C++ with VB. Starting with 5.0, VB added native x86 support by compiling down to VC++'s object format, then using VC++'s linker to produce the
Here's the final nail in the coffin. I just came back from VBITS, and Microsoft's VStudio product manager was there. He delivered Monday's keynote, which was a preview of VB7, and moderated a Q&A that night. When asked about the future of "Java" at Microsoft, he said this: Sun's lawsuit against Microsoft (which is, admit it, nothing more than a pissing contest) has J++ tied up in knots right now. Microsoft can't make a move in the Java space without conceding to Sun, which billg's pride won't let him do. Therefore, C#. All of the language benefits of Java, without Scott McNeally's MS-wannabe oneupsmanship.
Of course, all of this talk about C# is speculation right now. I'm eager to see the details, especially considering that there was not a word about C# at VBITS. Plenty of SOAP (which is a very Good Thing, BTW), but no C#.
Every day we're standing in a wind tunnel
Facing down the future coming fast - Rush
This sig intentionally left blank.
I mean, what's with the blind devotion to WORA concept? I mean, what's wrong with taking the nice language java is and allowing it to take advantage of the underlying platform. sure java was intended to be WORA, but why stop other people from being able to make it do *more things*.
The entire point of Java is that it will run anywhere. Take that away and it becomes just another OOL that is almost but not quite like C++. We don't need another one of those.
Insistence over control of the language!@?!?!? Didn't they invent the language? Does GM give its' cars away for free?
Wrong analogy. That's not the point I'm making. My point is how Sun, not once, but twice, went to two standards bodies (ISO and ECMA) to start the process of making Java a standard. In both cases Sun pulled out of the processes at the 11th hour. I don't have any complaints with Sun controlling Java as long as it is understood up front that this is their intention to do so, and they remain consistant about it . I liked the langauge even before Sun made the grand announcement about seeking standardization, which helped further Sun's cause. It is my feeling that Sun cynically played not only on anti-Microsoft sentiment to further their own position but on the strong pro feelings many have about open standards. It was a one-two combination that helped grease the skids of acceptance in a lot of quarters. Once Sun was assured of its position, however, it realized it had no need to complete either of the standardization processes; they had achieved what Microsoft has achieved, a defacto lockin in a lot of organizations. And many of us felt used because of it.
The ends never justify the means, not even when fighting against Microsoft. When you use Microsoft's tactics, you're no better than they are.
> Yet another lame MS "techonology" marketing name.
"Remember, it's spelled 'C#', but it's pronounced M-O-R-E-C-R-A-P-F-R-O-M-M-I-C-R-O-S-O-F-T."
--
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Why not get the stoners on our side with GANJA? Cuz Ganja Ain't No JAva, mon.
< tofuhead >
It is still the dark of night.
I mean, we all know it ain't for geeks until there's an O'Reilly book, right?
--sugarman--
are confusing Java the programming language with Java the operating environment.
Actually, I am aware of the distinction. Usually when people refer to just Java, they mean the language, bytecode, and a VM that will run it as specified in Sun's documentation.
By 'extending' the language, MS came up with something that would only work with MS products, which violated the intent of Java.
If I write something in ANSI C adhering to posix specs, I expect it to COMPILE and RUN on any posix system with an ANSI C compiler (provided that I stick to libraries available on all platforms).
For Java, the compiler is expected to accept only standard source, and compile it into bytecode that runs on all compliant JVMs using libraries that will also run on all JVMs.
gcc does have several non-standards in it, but it doesn't purport that you can freely use those extensions and expect all to be well with other compilers. OTOH, it is more portable than MS Java since there's a gcc for just about anything these days at no cost. How many platforms does MS support?
Go away, learn IBM COBOL (as used on MVS), learn ICL COBOL (as used on George 3), and then come and talk about language pollution :-)
I'm not sure I want to know! COBOL is painfull enough as it is.
If you don't like it. Don't use it.
I personally love the idea of reducing the redundant tasks C++ COM programmers have to go thru.
They are clearly not the only good technology publisher.
I like Sams, McGraw Hill and Prentice Hall.
Sams would go to people who made electronics and get technical information from them and use that to compile repair manuals for TVs, Radios, and other electronics.
You could get repair manuals for the Commodore 128, The IBM PC and many other companys.
Now a days companys have become paranoid. Oh my ghod someone might use that information and make a compeating TV set.
Anyway O'Reilly is very populare and even used by Microsoft employees.
They document such things as Microsoft Windows, BSD (Hah sorry Zico they DO have a BSD book) and the palm pilot.
Zico is basicly full of it... allways is... He has some agenda. No he isn't some Microsoft plant or from the Krull invasion force.
He has some stake in this. It's probably some stake in Microsoft but that might not be the case. Maybe it's just that you could code crud on a stick and sell it for Windows but couldn't give it away on Linux.
Anyway O'Reilly is known for having Lary Wall on the payroll. Not for writing Linux books.
They see themselfs as compeating with "Dumbies" books so when the populare title shifts out of tech books into self help books you find "In a nutshell" not far behind.
Along with Dumbies and Nutshell I also recomend Sams "Teach Yourself" books...
Zico should have gotten "Teach yourself Labotomy in a week" instead of "Labotomy for Dumbies".
I don't actually exist.
And then there's this one that did the rounds a few years ago:
//child classes can now be derived // define MySclass
// illegitimate
// OK now
***New Subject Oriented Programming Language***
C+- (pronounced "C more or less")
Unlike C++, C+- is a subject oriented language. Each C+- class instance, known as a subject, holds hidden members, known as prejudices or undeclared preferences, which are impervious to outside messages, as well as public members known as boasts or claims. The following C operators
are overridden as shown:
> better than
> much better than
forget it
! not on your life
== comparable, other things being equal
C+- is a strongly typed language based on stereotyping and self-righteous logic. The Boolean variables TRUE and FALSE (known as constants in less realistic languages) are supplemented with CREDIBLE and DUBIOUS, which
are fuzzier than Zadeh's traditional fuzzy categories. All Booleans can be declared with the modifiers strong and weak. Weak implication is
said to "preserve deniability" and was added at the request of the D.O.D. to ensure compatability with future versions of Ada. Well-formed
falsehoods (WFFs) are assignment-compatible with all booleans. What-if and why-not interactions are aided by the special conditional evenifnot X then Y.
C+- supports information hiding and, among friend classes only, rumor sharing. Borrowing from the Eiffel lexicon, non-friend classes can be
killed by arranging contracts. Note that friendships are intransitive, volatile, and non-Abelian.
Single and multiple inheritance mechanisms are implemented with random mutations. Disinheritance rules are covered by a complex probate protocol. In addition to base, derived, virtual, and abstract classes, C+- supports gut classes. In certain locales, polygamous derivations and
bastard classes are permitted. Elsewhere, loose coupling between classes is illegal, so the marriage and divorce operators may be needed:
marriage (MParent1, FParent1);
sclass MySclass: public MParent1, FParent1
{
sclass YourSclass: public MParent1, FParent2
divorce (MParent1, FParent1);
marriage (MParent1, FParent2);
sclass YourSclass: public MParent1, FParent2
{
Operator precedence rules can be suspended with the directive #pragma dwim, known as the "Do what I mean" pragma. ANSIfication will be firmly resisted. C+-'s slogan is "Be Your Own Standard."
In my experience, an "easy-to-use" programming language has the result of being horribly bloated, since you have to include features you'd never use, since it's so friendly to have everything already done for you. Reusable code should only go but so far. Personally, I like C/C++ even in its more obscure moments. I like not having to link in complex number handling when I code "Hello World".
I live now in mortal fear that GCC will support this.
WARNING: there is a trojan on your
A friend of mine, after learning to use Visual C++, stopped calling it "C++" and started calling it "The Microsoft Language" or "TML" for short. He said that TML bore little resemblance to actual C++, what with COM and all, and was more accurately described as TML.
Can't wait to hear his take on d-flat.
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
Didn't they invent the language? Does GM give its' cars away for free?
Cars and programming languages have a very different tradition. AT&T Bell Labs is the creator of two of the most popular programming languages in the world: C and C++. The development of both of these languages is guided by the appropriate ANSI committe. Ditto FORTRAN, ADA and many other languages which are managed through standards. Languages like Python, Perl, Scheme and TCL are not managed through standards, but their reference implimentations are open source, and thus wide open to the community.
That leaves two newcommers as the tidings of an unfortunate trend: Java and Coctothorpe. These languages are strictly managed by their "owners" (as if one can own a language in the first place). This leaves the future somewhat uncertain for those of us who have always assumed that it was obvious to all that open standards are the way you manage a programming language.
It's fairly moot anyhow. The correct response to Coctothorpe is to evaluate it's usefulness and, if it is deemed worthy, write a GCC front-end for it or (if it's interpreted-only like Java) then a run-time implimentation can be written and open sourced. Until our government (which in the case of intellectual property is rapidly becoming the UN) gets stupid and declares languages patentable, we're OK implimenting our own Java and Coctothorpe.
- Oberon
- Modula-3
- Limbo (from Bell Labs)
- Sather
- real-time Java
It's too bad Microsoft needs to reinvent the wheel, again. But, I suppose, except for Java, those things don't use enough braces, and RT Java wasn't an option for them.Well, if they manage to come up with a language definition that is as decent, efficient, and simple as Oberon or Modula-3 and they manage to make it successful, that's still a big win for everybody. For systems programming, C really needs to be replaced by something that is a bit safer without being a lot more complex. But given Microsoft's track record on language design, I won't hold my breath.
People have found all sorts of uses for C++ constructors/destructors, but when it comes down to it, C++ is the oddball language there, and destructors in C++ cause all sorts of problems.
Reference counting leaks circular references. Reference counting is also inefficient compared to a good garbage collector. And reference counting in C++ fails to give you the runtime safety that a system based on garbage collection gives you. Essentially, there is no way to write portable memory management code in C++ that works as efficiently, reliably, and safely as built-in garbage collection.
Didn't Apple abandon ObjC in favour of C++?
When they say C# is language-independent, they're actually talking about the underlying object model, libraries, and runtime platform. It shares the same runtime platform as VB (called the "URT"), and there's no reason any language in general couldn't be made to compile to the URT. In case you haven't heard, Microsoft is also completely revamping the VB language. C# and VB will be almost identical in terms of power and what you can do with them. It seems to me that C# is more or less just an alternative for the people - including most developers at MS - who simply don't like using VB, and, as has already been pointed out, a response to Java. Even the developers at Microsoft admit (amongst themselves) that C# and Java are practically identical languages on the surface. But really, it's more or less equivalent to the new VB, it just uses a C-like syntax.
They also are producing something called "managed C++", which is mostly a bunch of hacks to the C++ language to allow programs to compile and run on the URT. They are pretty much betting the company on this new platform. The language independence comes from the fact that all managed code (anything that runs on the runtime) uses the same object model and can share libraries. WFC has been implemented on the URT (written in C#), and it also has a bunch of system libraries which are all pretty well designed. The reason they say it's cross-platform is because everything is compiled to run on the URT, not natively. In theory, the URT can be ported to other platforms, and immediately any app that runs on it will run on those platforms. In the future, pretty much EVERY Windows app will run on the URT, so this is a good thing. The libraries for it are very rich, so there's no reason an application would need to use any Windows API calls or the like. The only real problem, of course, is that the URT will still be proprietary and controlled by Microsoft. However, it's not the mess that COM was (despite the fact the it was originally called COM+ 2.0), and may be easier to reverse engineer. The fact that it abstracts away pretty much anything that's Windows-specific (no more registry, among other things) certainly is a good step towards portability.
In my opinion, the platform Microsoft is working on now is by far the best progress they have made in a long time, and it's long overdue. They've realized that the current Windows development model is broken, and has no future, especially as the Internet takes over. Instead of trying to continually extend what they've done before, they're pretty much completely abandoning the existing infrastructure. They are throwing backwards compatibility out the window, which is what they needed to do a long time ago. Unfortunately, due to the DOJ stuff, I wouldn't be surprised if the public never even sees the fruits of these efforts. I've never liked Microsoft's software or many of the things they've done, but this is something they've got right. I really dislike what they're intending to use it for, which is to offer software as a service over the Internet, but as a development platform, the URT is exactly what the world needs right now. Of all their major undertakings - and this is one of the biggest - it's probably the first which is truly well-designed with the potential to last for a long time.
A lot of this progress on the URT, C#, WFC, and such can probably be attributed to Anders Hejlsberg, the mind behind Borland's Turbo Pascal and Delphi who moved to Microsoft a few years ago to be the WFC architect.
It seems to me Modula-3 (http://www.m3.org/) is functionally equivalent to Ada and otherwise a much better choice. Like Ada, it has generics, modules, threads, objects, dynamic typing, static typing, and explicitly unsafe modules, but it is a much simpler language than Ada. There are multiple free and commercial implementations, listed at the m3.org site.
Yes, but in the course of playing music a different thought process is involved with C# than is with Db. It's really subjective and really weird.
I believe you are correct.
No correction of mine would be complete without another error.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
C-- is intended, as the article suggests, as a "portable assembly language."
There actually are some implementations available in source form.Microsoft may produce some software of frightening quality, but that doesn't mean that the people that they hire are ignoramuses, but merely that:
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
It turned out that it was just COBOL, with some code removed. The mainframers loved it, but it didn't fly too well with anyone else..
_________________
JavaScript Error: http://www.windows2000test.com/default.htm, line 91:
You might be onto something there... C-Hash... CHash... sounds remarkably like 'CASH' doesn't it? This is the real reason MS is making this language.
Although I'm sure we had figured that out already.
-- Dr. Eldarion --
This sounds almost like java set up to have C keywords in it. Which, if you have studied many of the C family of languages, is usually the case with anything other than C/C++/C--.
Eh...
So C# could also be pronounced "C Hash", or simply "Cash".
Methinks it's the same guys who named WinCe...
Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.
.- CitizenC (User Info)
The JVM was created to support the Java language, but there's no reason that you must use Java to write for the JVM.
In fact, many other languages have been written, compilers to target the JVM bytecode format. Also, the JNI (Java Native Interface) grew out of Netscape's support for C APIs to call into, and be called by, JVM bytecode.
I wonder if Csharp/Dflat/Chash/Cpound/Coctothorpe might be targeting Microsoft's JVM implementation, which has gotten good grades on speed, or if it really is a whole new virtual machine.
Microsoft doesn't appear to be claiming that the new language is free from entanglements with the operating system. In fact, if their "C#VM" were to make it easy to use COM/VBA automation, and to use native C# programs as clients and as services, it could be a win for them.
I think they're missing the mark, though. Sun's reluctance to allow their JVM to be managed by an outside standards group, and Microsoft's reluctance to follow outside de facto standards, both played to this announcement.
[
Really, they shouldn't throw 'em up so easily. With a softball like that, I can just see the headlines:
C# Falls Flat
Microsoft hits a sour note
and so on. Perhaps they took the view that smart people wouldn't even touch the easier ones.
...none of the other vendors has the clout to do it M$-style, or their own dominant OS to lock it into.
As for the Ob. Recursive Acronym, I propose BINJ, unless you're a fan of Vernor Vinge, in which case you might prever RINJ, SINJ, or (esp) KINJ.
Yo dawg, I heard you like the Ackermann function, so OH GOD OH GOD OH GOD
which one of the Baby Bills gets the IP?
How about Ganja AiNt JavA ?
yet another kludge
old ideas becoming new
through # defining
c# -- a wrap of
15 year old libraries
macros everywhere
Microsoft again
finding more ways to abuse
the preprocessor
Uhh, it sounds to me like this is Windows-only. What the hell are these guys smoking? It runs on Windows 98 and NT 4 and 2000, so that makes it OS-independent? Unless Microsoft ports it so it runs on Linux or Mac OS X or something, I don't see how anyone can call it OS-independent.
G# anyone?
--
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
Really, a C++ smart pointer class is a trivial thing to write and gives you all the same advantages. I wrote one in 100 lines a few weeks ago and it works just as well as Java's garbage collection. The article seems to suggest that this is one of C#'s greatest features. Hmm, kinda like W2k having that "symbolic linking" thing.
------
One of Microsoft's claims about C# is that it will allow "developers (to) access any hardware and software." C# provides "complete access to (the) underlying platform." At the same time they claim that this is a "web development language". Imagine , if you will, a poorly programmed piece of code that has vulnerablities in it. The kind of exploits that C# allows for (in concept) are on a different level entirely than the one's we see now. More access to hardware + a web language == A Bad Thing.
And I don't even have to mention that the evironment (at least initially) that a C# program would run in would be written by M$ (motto: 64k is enough bugs for everyone). Remote root exploits galore.
...because I'm pro-Windows will now be shocked. Here's what I have to say: GO AWAY.
Don't want another syntax. Don't need another syntax. Like C. Like C++. Hate most everything else.
Why? Two words: Content obsolescence. That's all Java ever did for me. Great... another language to learn. Blow me. Take your C-# (c-pound) and POUND IT.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
Hey someone already has the trademark on C Sharp. Just ask Al Stevens of Dr. Dobb's Journal.
Y'know, it may be time we came up with a clear delineation between a post like this and a real troll-post. It's a short, sharp reply to the post above it. It states an opinion which is on topic and relevant to the discussion, even if it offers no support for that opinion.
If it hadn't been modded down to -1, would it have started a thread of more reasonable posts which would have considered the circumstances and motivations surrounding M$ new programming language vs. those surrounding Sun's development of Java? Those of us who read at -1 have seen it happen.
Is stating an opinion about some language, OS or company really trolling? If this guy posted a comment that said "MS sucks" or "Windows sucks" and got modded down -1 flamebait, I could understand, but whoever this AC is, his post is at least on topic and relevant. He didn't post it 500 times in a row, and he didn't craft it to look like a normal post only to change halfway through to a post about NP or grits or whatever. I don't think it's a troll.
-jpowers
-jpowers
Wouldn't it be good to wait until the language is actually unveiled before you bash it as "crap"?
You're new here, arent you?
Right, it's apparent from the article that this language (which I have chosen to call C-Pound ;) is an attempt to "Embrace & Extend" C++. Which, really isn't necessary, but hey, we have to cut them some slack -- dirty tricks are the only games Microsoft knows how to play.
Er... what?
Stroustrup has approved the language by the way. Just thought you'd like to know.
You might find out why if you compare C# to some of Stroustrup's bitch list in "The Design and Evolution of C++"
Simon
Coming soon - pyrogyra
Don't forget that if you want the database tools, you must purchase the Enterprise Edition.
They actually pulled this with VisualStudio 6.
You know, the one that had the next version of InterDev 1.0, called InterDev 6.0
They should have called it "Microsoft Language" to go along with all their other boring product titles!
The basic description sounds like they're trying to reinvent PHP.
From the PHP-FAQ:
Much of its syntax is borrowed from C, Java and Perl with a couple of unique PHP-specific features thrown in. The goal of the language is to allow web developers to write dynamically generated pages quickly.
While the CNET article doesn't mention Web scripting, where else does this "C#" go? VB and VC++ are used primarily for stand-alone apps, while MS only has VBScript and JScript. Do they want to establish a wholly new server scripting language? Considering that classical CGI is impractical on NT/2000, server-side scripting is the only niche they can exploit. Given the wealth of tools available in the UNIX/Linux world, it'll never be popular there.
In fact, I'll bet that this new "language" will resemble BASIC (or maybe even FoxPro) in syntax more that anything else. Maybe it'll use C++ and JAVA functions, but it'll never be called innovative by anyone familiar with the industry.
As far as being a JAVA killer, developers should not forget that being familiar with multiple platforms makes you a more valuable programmer. The Microsoft world is just one of many worlds in the UNIXverse (couldn't resist the pun). It'll be just one more thing the MCSE, MCD and other MS cult members will get certified in only to watch it fade away in a couple of years.
INTERCAL ???
It's true, there are too many languages !!!
- sigs are for wimps.
You've expressed a common misconception that I think is worth correcting. I'll follow this with an opinion.
Fact:
Reference counting is NOT the same as garbage collection. Reference counting cannot collect circular data structures that have been disconnected from the program's active store (like a circularly linked list or a graph).
Opinion:
Garbage collection is a really nice feature for a language to have. Since I program in ML (my favorite advanced programming language), I never have to deal with memory errors of any kind, ever. Garbage collection also opens the way for type-safe languages, so that we can write programs which are guaranteed not to crash. This is another really nice thing (also supported in ML).
Overall, I think C# will have to find a niche to be successful, and I certainly don't think that niche will be scalable, web-centric systems. Java's greatest weakness is it's performance on the client side. Maybe there's room for another cross-platform language there, but then AWT and Swing are fairly entrenched.
BTW - Anybody notice how the article lied about the Sun lawsuit? Check it out:Now that's BS if ever I heard it. Microsoft could easily update its Java products at any time, so long as they honor their contract with Sun and make them JDK compliant! But instead, they decide to kill what could have been a great product and put something else out instead.
If you put a racing saddle on a jackass, it's still a jackass...
"You done taken a wrong turn."
-Bill McKinney, in Deliverance
Are you kidding me? NINJA!! Ninja Is not JAva
It's rare that you're presented with a knob whose only two positions are Make History and Flee Your Glorious Destiny.
" C#" rhymes with CRASH!
I see blue already
134340: I am not a number. I am a free planet!
A quote from the article:
Goodhew added that C# allows "developers (to) access any hardware and software." C# provides "complete access to (the) underlying platform."
Great... I get to open up all my devices to the web... how secure is that? How am I supposed to know if I should grant or deny when a box pops up that says:
This web application has requested access to your hardware. Would you like to grant it? (y/n)
I mean, I could "just say no" -- but then I might miss out on a jolly tune! WTF?
I can smell the viruses brewing from here.
Another quote from the article:
It provides operating system independence (which Java provides), but it also provides language independence, which Java can't provide.
"Language Independence"? That statement is a bit vague -- so I am not sure what this guy is trying to say, but if he is talking about i18n, he is just wrong! Not only does Java have i18n support, but it would also be trivial to implement in any language that didn't. What the heck does this guy mean?
Certain patterns of memory access get better performance under one or the other scheme. Mostly you'll see best performance with down-and-dirty machine level stuff (C/ASM), as usual.
Most garbage collectors work by sweeping over the active areas of the heap, and copying anything which is reachable. So, the cost is linear in the amount of memory you're using (it never really detects circular structures; it just never copies them).
But consider:
My current area of study is programming language/compiler design, and I can testify that practically nobody publishing in journals these days cares about "old fashioned" ideas like C. Basically everything we know to be done to optimize C code has been done to death. "New fangled" languages are the future (er, duh). Mainly, these languages are built around elaborate type systems, which give the compiler and programmer a way to reason about a program without running it. It's lots of math stuff that sometimes gives the compiler the ability to make optimizations that would be impossible in C (because more is known about the way the program behaves while compiling).
Home-brew memory management (malloc/free, new/delete) are unfortunately a big problem for these static type disciplines, since the contents of memory is very dynamic. Garbage collection lets us design these type systems more easily, and gives us more power.
So, not only is garbage collection extremely convenient, it also enables other really nice language and compiler features, some of which can speed up your program even if GC slows it down.
So it's designed to run on a completely cross-platform VM, and they will openly license it to anyone, for free? Cool! Way to innovate!
SOmehow.. I doubt it..
That's because most *n[iu]x scripts, including shells and Perl scripts, start counting at 0... $# is the # of the last argument, not the total of the list. (It works well when you are counting arguments from a single command, because the command itself is 0, so $# will equal the number of args that follow the command.)
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
That your grasp of Java (and garbage collection) is rudimentary is made obvious by the forgoing statement. Out of fear that there are other's who disparage garbage collection for lacking destructors let me throw this into the thread.
Using a destructor in a garbage collection scheme would be like writing top level functions under object orientation. Like C++, yes. The point, though, is that the collector takes care of your allocated and unused memory on the fly without interference. And while it feels weird to create objects and then leave them to be collected when you start Java (or other GC environments) the idea is that, much like the register directive, delete is a thing of the past; the machine should know best how to deal with it.
Finally, the result of run time checking and garbage collection is a debug cycle shorter than the coding cycle. And even though you might disparage the specific implementation, that's a result that's very very nice.
To be sure, I code a lot more in C++ than Java, but that's because I'm looking at final run speeds, not development turnaround.
Ushers will eat latecomers.
IP is just rude.
Is there any torture so subl
On a touchtone phone it's also called an "octothorp". So we should pronounce this "cock-toe-thorp."
Insistence over control of the language!@?!?!? Didn't they invent the language? Does GM give its' cars away for free? Why do they not have the right to control the language? I am not for or against Sun and/or Microsoft. What I am against is the fact that every post on this site seems to say 'You have no right to control what you invent if we like it'. If you don't like their control, don't use it! Use something else! Just stop whinning
Ooo... so close, but not quite right.
You are more right that the person who is insisting they are not the same on "non-fretted" instruments.
Tonality of notes used to depend on the scale you were playing, and the position of the note within the scale. All notes were perfectly tuned relative to the tonic note, or "root" of the scale. The problem with this was that an organ tuned to play in the key of G-sharp would sound badly out of tune if played in the key of E-flat.
During the baroque era, the concept of the "tempered" instrument came about. Octaves, fourths and fifths became universal across the keyboard, and the seconds, thirds, sixths, and sevenths were all tweaked so you could change keys and still have a perfect fifth sound like a perfect fifth. Tempered keyboards were not perfectly in tune in the traditional sense, but the change was needed to meet the demands of modern compositions.
When the means to measure sound frequencies came about, things were locked down even tighter (which is why "middle A", the second fret on a guitar, is often called "A 440).
Today, C-sharp and D-flat are played with the same key on the piano, same fret on a guitar, and are generally considered to be the same note... However, in the context of a performance a good musician will adjust the pitch of the note ever-so-slightly to fit with the intonation of the ensemble and melody (if they are singing or playing an instrument that allows it).
So to sum up... yea, it is the same note spelled differently - most of the time.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
C sharp is the enharmonic equivalent of D flat. Which is probably what I'll end up calling this language.
"Beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he deems himself your master."
You'd want C then, wouldn't you?
Java is not an appropriate replacement for C for system programming.
Try "C" for that, it's quite good.
For example (my biggest peeve), Java lacks an unsigned data type.
I think C has that.
I think it would be great to have a language for system programming that was cleaner that C++ and without the limits of Java.
Well, you could use C++ and not use the unclean bits.
People talk about native compiled Java, but let's face it, the language is very tied to the JVM. It is not designed to be a system programming language like C, with it's non-specified sized data types, non-defined byte order, etc that you need for maximum efficiency.
No, you're right; best stick to C, then.
Only people who don't understand the differences between Java and C++ could possibly see this as a competitor to Java.
Only people who can't understand the similarities between C and C++ could see this as a competitor to a dead cat.
I would ask people to not condemn it just because it's from Microsoft.
Can we condem it for being pointless?
Let's wait to see what pops out.
That's the sort of reasoning that got John Hurt killed in Alien.
there are few companies with as much experience with OOP than Microsoft.
There are few companies with as much experience in screwing their customers, but I don't think that's a reason to wait to see how they're going to do it next.
TWW
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
Now that I think of it, why not get technical and use the famous Bell Labs technical term for #? Oh wait, that would make it Coctothorpe. Not much of a ring to it.
Very Asinine Generally Incompetent New Ass-Language ;-)
See? A little profanity and it's ten times funnier... right?
Saturday Night MotherFucking Live!!!
hmm, ok it's gonna take a bit more work than that...
--
grappler
Vidi, Vici, Veni
they have a quote on c|net where an M$ executive claims OS independance for C#.. later, he goes on to say that it's part of visual studio.. so.. hmm..
awesome! this must mean they're releasing visual studio for solaris, linux, and all the *BSD's!
Thanks, microsoft! You kids are swell!
--
blue
i browse at -1 because they're funnier than you are.
Yet another uninformed anti-Java rant.
Speaking as someone who has written a couple hundred thousand lines of Java code and seen that code work without tweaking, first time, on OS/2 and Macintosh after developing it exclusively on UNIX and testing it on Windows, I have to disagree with this 'almost not cross platform' assertion. Scratch that, I really have to laugh at it.
The trick to cross platform coding with Java is that you have to code to the set of API's that Sun has published and standardized. If you do that, and if you don't fall into a hole that Sun has left in their API's, you're fine. Someone has to define the greatest common denominator of portability, and Sun's been doing a surprisingly good job at that.
I will be very interested to see if Microsoft will even attempt to define a substantial set of runtime API's for the C# runtime or whether they will just provide COM and SOAP and claim that that's good enough while encouraging everyone to use COM-wrapped Win32 to get their work done.
I'm quite looking forward to seeing what Microsoft actually has in this C# and whether they actually have something new and innovative. All the blather about C# not being a response to Java is obvious nonsense, of course.
If Microsoft attempts to duplicate the Java API set with C#, then they will be open to all the same criticisms of platform definition and limited service coverage that Java has been since it was created. If they attempt merely to provide clean access to operating system API's with really decent runtime #ifdef and #include type functionality, so that the same piece of code can conditionally execute sections of code based on the underlying environment, while still sharing the high level logic and providing a Java-like code distribution framework *and* just enough runtime functions like threading and garbage collection, then they might have something which might really swing the pendulum away from Java.
They'd have to standardize it, though, after screaming at Sun for four years about that.
Interesting times ahead.
- jon
Ganymede, a GPL'ed metadirectory for UNIX
C# is three semitones higher than Bb. The even-tempered western scale goes: C,C#,D,Eb,E,F,F#,G,Ab,A,Bb,B
Nick
-- "It's a sad day for American capitalism when a man can't fly a midget on a kite over Central Park" - Jim Moran
"C# is Java by another name," said Steve Mills, general manager of IBM's software division.
If Microsoft can't make their own flavor of Java, and call it Java, then they'll just do the same thing, and call it something else ("C#"). This is a very typical strategy from M$: mirror an existing technology, add enough "features" that it's not compatible, then use their market clout to shove it down everyone's throat.
Yo dawg, I heard you like the Ackermann function, so OH GOD OH GOD OH GOD
Perfect! We can just agree that the "-H" in "C-Hash" is silent.
Practice saying it with me: "This app was written with Microsoft Chash."
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
The honestly expect programmers to pronounce this C sharp , when we all say pound for "#".
This comes somewhat naturally (pun intended) for those of us who read music.
(# is the musical symbol to augment a natural note a half tone, making it sharp)
Calling "C#" an embrace and extend play on Java is like calling Java an embrace and extend play on C++. In either case they are simply two competing OO languages with a common base (C-style programming). I actually welcome this. Hopefully Microsoft will make their technology multiplatform (not holding my breath, but..). It would actually be a GOOD thing to have a serious Java competitor out there to light a fire under Sun's collective asses.
The reason is that the C standard had to be open to the use of C for quite a lot of specific applications, notably including embedded applications, that aren't really representative of of the "portable assembler" intent.
In addition, C-- adds in semantics relating to memory management, garbage collection, and such, that C actively eschews, and which C++ left out for so long that it seems unrealistic for it ever to cleanly address.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
For whatever reason, which we don't really need to know about as we are just programmers, Microsoft is not supporting Java wholeheartedly on Windows. So what if they come up with their own language, as long as it's got some really neat technical features like what's in Java? Cool, I say. At least Microsoft know how to get the best performance out of Windows and in the end we all benefit.
Face it, we are all going to have to learn this language sooner or later. Our management will see to that. Windows is the most common OS on this planet and if we want to continue to earn a living, this language is in our future.
Let's be practical, gentlemen.
-o Disclaimer: My employer doesn't even agree with me about C indentation style. o-
> # is pronounced "sharp" on sheet music.
;)
I'm not thinking about sheet music when I'm programming. Maybe I should ?
- sigs are for wimps.
Next in the line of programming languages
Db - D Flat: The same as C Sharp, yet extended a little further
Ebbb - E Triple Flat: Even cooler...cause it uses more musical notations then all other programming languages ever developed
oh..and since when are programming languages equated with musical notation?
Just because it's fun (and easy!) to bash the parent company does not mean that the research division is composed of hairy-backed, knuckle-dragging cretins.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
MS Java's incompatibilities weren't mistakes at all. They were part of the normal embrace, extend, extinguish strategy that they rely on. The only flaw in their plan was that Sun stopped MS before they could completely extend Java. At this point it's probably easier for MS to invent a new language than to find more ways to tear down Java.
Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and
Not just touchtone phones, Octothorpe is the correct name for the # symbol.. though i'm betting the MS marketing department didn't know that, because Coctothorpe sounds like a really awful porn adaptation of a B-grade horror movie.
Dreamweaver
"If a man hasn't discovered something he will die for, he isn't fit to live" -- MLK, Jr.
I don't say "pound". I say "hash". What the heck does "pound" have to do with it anyway? (yes, it was the symbols for the pound measurement or somesuch, but that is pretty much irrelevant usage).
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
There isn't any real different. In all the intial press announcements and early books on Java, it was proclaimed that Java was a better C++ because it didn't allow pointers and had automatic garbage collection (memory management) than C/C++ (amoung other things). The problem with Java is Sun's desire to maintain control. What makes the control so blatant is that Sun went through two exercises where they were going to make it an open standard, only to kill that effort at the last minute. Rather than rehash the why and wherefore of both attempts, let me just say that it would ahve been better if Sun had never even made the effort in the first place. Sun has, IMHO (and many others) come across looking like M$ in the way it has handled not just Java but the community at large; cynical and manipulative for the ultimate benifit of Sun.
And I'm sorry you got modded down by someone who can't differentiate between a legitimate question and a real troll. I'd like to know who moderates comments so that we could moderate the moderators.
I use Macs for work, Linux for education, and Windows for cardplaying.
I dunno about you, but I do know basic. real basic.
And Visual Basic is not anywhere close to what real basic looks like. (not that I'm comparing them.. visual basic is far more powerful than basic).
There is very little resemblance these days. Very little. So 'knowing' basic won't help you get anywhere in visual basic methinks.
Ease of use and platform access have nothing to do with the inherent dangers of a programming language. Ideally, a programming language should be powerful enough to let you do anything with the hardware short of exploding the monitor, and easy enough to use that a baby can get some serious modeling done.
Security aspects of the code arise when people are capable of doing stuff to your programs that wasn't intended as per the design specs. In large part, the responsibility for this lies on the programmer, and not a lot on the company that developped the compiler and language. Of course, this is where C# is most likely gonna suck, much like VB does.
But don't say a powerful and easy to use language is a bad thing. Cause otherwise, we might as well all go back to Assembler.
"...Not a Java competitor..." ... "...It kind of mirrors (Java)..." ... "C# is the alternative to Java..."
So it has features of Java, is an alternative to java, but its not a competitor to Java. Hmm, that must mean that C# is going to be vapor or a big flop. Otherwise they are only contradicting themselves (which is quite rare to see in a single press release).
--
Eric is chisled like a Greek Godess
marotti.com
Read these, and think "Word Macros", or "ILoveYou"...
..."intended to drastically simplify and speed up software development"...
Good intentions, yep. Sounds about right.
"Microsoft has its own unique programming model with Visual Basic..."
That's putting it mildly.
"Combine it with the Web services (Microsoft) is announcing and you get powerful stuff.
Oh no!
Okay, I'm stopping right here.
Powerful + Easy-to-use => Dangerous
Anything about "Security" has to be marketing. If it's Powerful, and it's Easy-to-use in the Microsoft sense, and on the web... then you're going to be in BIG trouble, Real Soon Now.
---
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
Grrrrr. Is there no one left that calls C++ C sharp? (Imagine overstriking the two plusses to form a # sign.)
I have discovered a truly marvelous sig, unfortunately the sig limit is too small to contain i
Any number of names come to mind.
"What is in a name? Arrows by any other name would kill just as swift."
[
# is the musical symbol to augment a natural note a half tone, making it sharp
In other words, increment it (by a half-step - the basic quantum of the even-tempered scale).
So it's a double pun against C++ (i.e. "C incremented by one", or "The next step beyond C"). The other, of course, being that # looks like two +es overlaid.
I note that by chosing "sharp" (add a half-step) they are only claiming half as much improvement over C as C++ does. B-)
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Have you ever tried it?
Naturally.
It breaks miserably on every system we have here, with every user. It breaks even worse on friends' and colleagues' systems. It is simply not designed to run under anything other than its own OS. Naturally.
You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem. (Edwards' Law)
Of course MS releases a new programming language.. they've probably had it in a red, glass-fronted box in the legal department for years marked with a "Break glass in case of anti-trust" sign. Now when they're forced to release the windows source code, they'll just release it in 'C sharp' which nobody knows and is just close enough to C and java to really screw up the people who Do know them.
Dreamweaver
"If a man hasn't discovered something he will die for, he isn't fit to live" -- MLK, Jr.
I am not a crook
I did not kill Nicole Brown Simpson
I did not have sexual relations with that woman
This is not a response to Java
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
RMS had some interesting thoughts on this --
Either the Open Source community rewrites Java (calling it by a different name, of course, to avoid trademark problems - [Something] Is Not Java) and then everyone has an open standard to write to; or, every large commercial concern rewrites Java, and then instead of one proprietary language, we have three or four.
Microsoft has been public about their C# ('COOL') plans for a long time. After a recent standards battle, IBM is grumbling about creating their own Java too. Venture capitalists are probably circling around a few Java-clone startups as we speak.
So, if we break this down further than Sun/Java = Good and MS/C# = Evil, you'll realize that Microsoft isn't really doing anything more than what other vendors will do eventually.
When I hear the word 'innovation', I reach for my pistol.
Let me make a few points clear:
- C# is just the latest name. COOL was the original code name, which was later changed to Safe C. They are all the same thing.
- At the time I left, they had no intention of being cross-platform compatible.
- They ARE trying to get a good RAD environment going. It is intended to fill that space between VB and VC++. If you want to crank out a fast GUI (for example), and hate MFC and VB, then this is for you.
- They've moved the WFC stuff from Java over to this new language. WFC is really nice to work with IMO.
- The execution engine (they don't call it a VM) is damn fast. Not native, but pretty good... faster than J++.
When it gets released, give it a try before you knock it. I think most people will be pleasantly surprised.
MS doesn't want to pull people from either. They want to pull prople away from Java.
Java Scares microsoft. It is Cross-Platform. Their attempts to extend and embrace failed. It is growing.
Microsoft needs to get people away from Java, and quickly. This is their latest evil plan.
Colin Davis
A footnote mark that is shaped like a Christian cross is called a "dagger," "thorn," or "thorpe."
A footnote mark that looks like two daggers, laid atop each other, one hilt up, one hilt down, is a duothorpe, or a double-dagger.
Lay eight daggers, with the hilts all arranged like a tic-tac-toe, and thus, you get the name "octothorpe."
AT&T apparently used it for the "pound" key on touch-tones, and PostScript uses that name for the symbol in their glyph libraries.
[
Whaddya wanna bet that if they create any *nix-based tools (hey, they tried to make IE run under Solaris) to increase their dominance, they'll embed the '#' character into a filename somewhere. And then all the tools that we love to work with won't work, because the "comment character" will break the line too early.
:-)
/. reader: I'M JOKING.)
Then they can require that their own nasty-ass build tools be used for developing D-flat.
(Note to standard
You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem. (Edwards' Law)
A lawsuit from the makers of Db (D flat) is expected. The lawsuit charges that C# and Db are, in fact, the same language.
Save the whales. Feed the hungry. Free the mallocs.
Let's see. We have a new product from Microsoft that:
It's the whole Microsoft strategy in a bottle again. I guess that their attempts to embrace and extend Java aren't working, so now their offering their Windows-only clone instead.
There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.
Where are the Haskell, Eiffel, or Dylan books? Forget things like Plan 9, relatively common OSes the various BSDs are considered too fringe for O'Reilly. O'Reilly's books are aimed at the mainstream person who thinks it would be cool if people considered him a geek -- the kind of people who download complete kernels instead of patch them -- rather than true geeks. Oooo, another Linux book, how cutting edge! The only books they still put out are those health books they surprisingly release, which are highly targetted -- things like Losing Your Gonads to Scabies: How to Cope.
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
# is a hash - what MS make of everything.
So it's CHASH, pronounced "ch-ash".
Government of the people, by corporate executives, for corporate profits.
Meanwhile, once you have posted to the list you are added to the FSCKMEINTHEA$$ mailing list (hosted by MS, or at least half of MS) that feeds your system every possible virus permutation imaginable by way of the special back door on port 666 that the C# jit compiler creates upon first execution.
My office has been taken over by iPod people.
Ada, TCL, Haskell, Lisp, BASIC, Logo, ML, Eiffel, Oberon-2, Sather, COBOL (erk), and numerous other languages I've never even heard of. There's a good list here.
Odd, FORTRAN wasn't on that list. There is an f2j compiler available too. Gives new meaning to that old quote:
Urk... I knew I would not be able to post something that long without an error...
A 440 is the open position of the second string of a guitar using standard tuning.
I sure hope nobody broke their Low-E string by tuning it up to G based on what I said. :(
(Sorry if this whole thread seems off-topic, but it was M$'s idea to name a program language after a note that's really hard to play in tune on brass instruments, not mine.)
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
I had heard they were coming out with a C++ based language called "COOL". It sounded very similar to this newer speculation about "C#".
There are a couple of problems with Microsoft coming out with a cross-platform language and expecting everyone to use it instead of it's competitors (C,C++, and Java are all reasonably well supported across most platforms.)
1. Microsoft isn't well known for good cross-platform support. Their new SOAP XML standards are a good start. However, the technologies VB, COM, and MFC extentions were quite well rememberred as terribly non-cross platform, even though they claimed COM was (and claimed NT was POSIX compliant).
2. There is a good deal of heavily entrenched and saturated languages like Java and TCL already poised to defend their positions.
3. Microsoft is more weak than ever in claiming "This is the future." Their future is quite uncertain now, even if they fix a deal with the Justice Department.
-Ben
(P.S. This sounds like a computer language made for people who played flue and programmed C before, and now want to try object modelling their computer synthesiser.)
When I first heard about COOL, I thought it should have been renamed to Simple Unified C++ Kit
--Shoeboy
(former microserf)
Since I came across it earlier today, I thought I might as well post it - J2SE 1.4 "Merlin" public review at the "Java Community Process". It's 59 pages long, though that's mostly because it is quite detailed. If you want to influence the direction of future Java development... now's the time - they do want response to this...
Microsoft's had info on a new language for a while, now -- something called Vault, although I don't think it's the same thing as the one that c|net is talking about. I haven't looked at either Vault or C# in any kind of detail yet, so I won't swear to it.
You might want to check out this link (http://www.research.microsoft.com/projects/Vault/ ) at the Microsoft Research site if you're interested in a little (and I mean little) more information about it than I can give you.
Cheers,
ZicoKnows@hotmail.com
As we all know, Csharp has 7 accidentals, whereas D flat only has five. If they'd named it Dflat, then they'd have saved an entire 2 accidentals, greatly reducing the amount of work necessary for implementation and otherwise vastly improving safety for all concerned. But no, they foreswore all concern for users and had to go with the marketing angle. Curses be upon them!
"If one is really a superior person, the fact is likely to leak out without too much assistance" -- John Andrew Holmes
Allrighty Smoking Joe, we'll find signal 11, lure him into my lair truss him up and convert him to the donk side.
His karma will not protect him from my vicious crew of vampire lesbian NASCAR drivers. (they wear asbestos undergarments in case of fire!)
Portman pics are here. When I say badly faked, I mean fat chicks who look nothing like NP and don't pretend to.
--Shoeboy
(former microserf)
Why do we need yet another C-like language. Why couldn't they be the least bit inventive something similar to scheme, haskell, or eiffel. But no. We must catter to all of the java, c and c++ programmers out there, many whom don't know that there are other, perhaps superior, things out there.
Please, someone start a movement to make functional languages more widespread! If one has already begun, let me know!
Uhm, remind me again why I would want to use web specific technology for MIDDLEWARE development. You know, making multiple flavors of big iron talk to each other. Abstracting away various legacy databases behind a single object model. That kind of crap. I fail to see how Apache and such would help me with that.
Oh, and it is Wisconsin-boy to you, and smile when you say that. :-)
Thad (I think I was just trolled)
The Bolachek Journals
Many versions of libc already provide "get string by string-id" and call it catgets().
Will I retire or break 10K?
OpenSource seem to be bend on rewritting everything under the sun.
And you people keep laughing at MS for not being innovative ?
That's right, because fretless string players don't play exactly in equal temperament. In equal tempered tuning, which almost all Western instruments are in, C sharp is the same tone as d flat. In just intonation, however, they are subtly different.
Quick primer on tunings, because it's not common knowledge (it is pretty offtopic, but germane to this thread): our old pal Pythagoras discovered that pitch is directly related to the length of the vibrating body (a string, an air column, etc.), and that the simplest ratios of the lengths of two strings are consonant. The most consonant ratio is 2:1 (an octave), followed by 3:2 (a perfect fifth), etc.
To get a scale, start at any pitch and find the next note one perfect fifth up, then the next, and so on until you reach an octave equivalent of your first note, which is your key. Find the octave equivalents of all of those notes and and you've got your scale. This is called just intonation. The only problem is that you're stuck in one key on that instrument, because the octave equivalent isn't exactly an octave equivalent.
To get around this, various methods have been created. The one that caught on was equal temperament (although well temperament was popular in the baroque era--hence the title of "The Well-Tempered Clavier"), in which the intervals between consecutive pitches are equalized, and certain close pitches are made equal (E# F, C# Db, etc.). In essence, every note in an equal tempered scale is a wrong note! They're just close enough that it's not particularly jarring.
---
Zardoz has spoken!
Oper on the Nightstar
Insistence over control of the language!@?!?!?
Yes!@?!?!?
Didn't they invent the language?
I don't know.. is derivation, invention? In the case of Sun, they promised a cross-platform language suitable for open development. However, as long as they control the standard of the language, or, as long as no outside standards body has say in the mores and means of the language, it is not open - it can be revoked or changed at any time, there is no truly open peer review process for decisions regarding features and etc. Contrast this to C or C++, both of which are controlled by the American National Standards Institute - things don't just mysteriously HAPPEN to C and C++, they are deliberated and discussed, and everyone has a say in what goes on. There will never be a change in C or C++ that initiated in a marketing meeting.
In a different way, but equally valid, is the model of perl, in which changes to the language are loudly and long-windedly discussed, but to which additional extension via the CPAN facility is the norm. There is no 'standard' for changes to perl, but its growth is controlled and nurtured by users to the benefit, mostly, of users. I feel pretty confident in saying that perl, also, is not likely to be steered by corporate mandate.
M$ is promising the same paradigm as Sun for their new language. Those who know Sun know that they are no no less harsh a mistress than M$ within their own arena. I do not like their control, and I do not use their language. A language is not, or should not be a product - it is a tool. Does someone control the design and use of a hammer, pliers or saws?
I do understand that Sun's development model for Java is more open than I've made it sound to be. I don't believe for a second that M$'s will be. If they want to make a closed, controlled language for use by people who pay for it, great, but don't go telling me how open it is, and how cross-platform it's going to be.
HTH!
--
long-winded blue
i browse at -1 because they're funnier than you are.
The problem with any Microsoft marketing is that you're bound to create a really wicked parody right out of the gate. Microsoft COOL led almost immediately to Microsoft CRUD (Corrupt Redundant Useless Development) and Microsoft SUCKs (Simple Unified C++ Kits); the parodies for C# are a little harder to come but still suggestive.....
Any others anyone can think of?
The Second Amendment Sisters
Finding God in a Dog
Just my $.02
Thad
The Bolachek Journals
It's easy to remember if you use mnemonics like "Must Call Someone Else", "Microsoft certified, seldom employable", or even "Major Crisis Starting Expert". Although on the VB issue, given that VB is programming (which is oftentimes a stretch), MCSD can easily be remembered by the handy mnemonics "My Code Suddenly Dies", "Machine Crashed, System Down", "Me Code! See Dialog?" or even "Mouse clicking shape dragger". It's easy with these simple memory improvement tricks!
"Cause there's 40 different shades of black, so many fortresses and ways to attack, so why you complainin'?"
Yeah, they don't have any info on security on their site. They'd really need to address this if they were to try to get some widespread adoption. Personally, I think Java's model is particularly well thought-out, but anything that allows the host application to explicitly allow and disallow certain features would work.
Digital signatures by themselves don't cut it. Trojan horses are too easy to write, and a clever virus writer could easily make his mischief untraceable to even a signed applet. (For more detail, try reading a message I wrote on netscape.public.mozilla.wishlist.
Are you sure? The license doesn't seem to fit the Open Source Definition. I may be wrong though.
---
Zardoz has spoken!
Oper on the Nightstar
I've got several questions about this new language of theirs, and I'd like to hear what the Slashdot audience might ahve to say about them. Any takers?
DO NOT LEAVE IT IS NOT REAL
> Gates: "New language, I dub thee 'Cee Shit'"
Somehow, I think this is the term that's going to catch on.
--
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
Keys like F, Bb, Eb, Ab, and, to a limited extent, C make us happy. Keys like G, D, A, E, and B give guitarists orgasms but really piss us--or at least me--off.
It's mostly a mental thing. I have to play this piece in E for a friend's wedding, and it took me a while to get used to hearing things in that key, because most jazz charts are in flat-friendly keys. Yes, friends, a LARGE part of playing music is hearing what you're playing inside your head.
That's why Microsoft does call their Java interupter a "JVM", but rather the "Microsoft Virtual Machine for Java". This implies there might be a Microsoft Virtual Machine for C# or VB or COM+/IL or ...
cpeterso