Slashdot Mirror


Another .NET Language

Wankers Anonymous writes "In an interview with David Simmons, CTO of SmallScript Corp., Learn about a new .NET language about to debut, the ins and outs of its creation, as well as some insider history behind the genesis of the .NET platform. "

34 comments

  1. well done... by REBloomfield · · Score: 1

    that was only posted two days ago....

    1. Re:well done... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but someone pointed out in one of the comments that all the .net "languages" are a thin veneer of alternate syntax over the same old single-inheritance (multiple interfaces DON'T COUNT), single-dispatch, Java-style crippled-OO system.

    2. Re:well done... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah, this story is like "Hooray someone made a new skin for winamp , using the winamp skin developer kit, and oh yeah, the skin is a copy of an old familiar skin nobody really uses anymore --- read more here"

      (all you're .NET stories belong to fail.NET)

    3. Re: well done... by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1


      > that was only posted two days ago....

      I wonder how many people are deliberately submitting stories that have already been posted, to see if they can get a dupe.

      I also wonder whether the editors are doing it deliberately, as some kind of joke (or attempt thereat).

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    4. Re:well done... by SteveX · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Notice in the article that Microsoft invited representatives from a LOT of different languages to the table when designing the CLR, to ensure that while they might not necessarily support them all ideally in v1, they wanted to make sure they weren't doing anything that would preclude them from supporting them in the future.

      The next version of the CLR adds support for generics and some other stuff.. language support will only get better. (I don't see Sun working on making the JVM better suited to languages other than Java...)

      - Steve

    5. Re:well done... by voodoo1man · · Score: 2, Interesting
      10 to 15 different languages? They can't even get an exact number, much less say what they are (and how closely they're related).

      At the very least, they didn't even bother looking at Common Lisp - Franz took a look at the CLR several years ago and decided that it wasn't even worth the trouble. It is impractical to get CLOS (the Common Lisp Object System - multiple dispatch, multiple inheritance, generic functions, and completely dynamic (you can re-define a class at runtime, and all the instances, and subclasses, etc. will be converted according to either a default or user specified method the next time they are accessed)) implemented with any sort of efficiency. Closures and dynamically generated lambdas (anonymous functions that capture a lexical environment and plain vanilla anonymous functions, created at runtime, respectively) seem to present a similar sort of problem from what I know of the CLR (I understand that they'd have to be represented as objects, please correct me if I'm wrong).

      I've heard other similar objections to the inadequacy of the CLR when it comes to dynamics languages, and overall I'm not terribly impressed with what Microsoft is doing or how it is going about it (the seemingly primary reason why .Net has/will have Scheme implementations from both Northwestern and PLT is because of rather large grants).

      --

      In the great CONS chain of life, you can either be the CAR or be in the CDR.

    6. Re:well done... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      CLR is the runtime library while IL is the Intermediate Language. You're mainly talking here about limitations of the IL.

      Effectively however these are criticisms that IL isn't high-level enough. Kind of missing the point; IL isn't designed to be high level - it's effectively an assembler code. Guess what? In assembler, you have to represent closures as objects. In assembler you can't implement CLOS primitives with much "efficiency" (number of instructions). CLR + IL define a platform which supports LISP + CLOS just as well as a raw CPU does; it JIT compiles so the speed of code is asymptotically more-or-less the same. And Allegro Common LISP is hardly a poster child for efficiency anyway.

      One issue with all this is that the JIT phase can slow down certain very dynamic programs. Python.NET has issues in places because of this. But that's the price you pay for using a bytecode. Java would have the same problem if it attempted to be as powerful and dynamic as .NET.

      However, I must agree that MS seem to have dropped the ball somewhat in their support of lexical closure. It is possible, but it's highly awkward, AIUI. However, these are not mainline features that Microsoft's market are demanding. What Microsoft is offering is a unified programming paradigm for Visual Basic, C++ and C#. Other languages are "nice-to-have", but hardly essential for 99% of the world's programming needs.

    7. Re:well done... by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Generics are not the problem of the VM or CLR. Its a problem of the compiler.

      On a Java VM simply any language, except perhaps C++ compiles and runs.

      See http://grunge.cs.tu-berlin.de/~tolk/vmlanguages.ht ml for an overview.

      The only limitation the Java VM has is that it supports only single inheritance. So if you like to map C++ to JBC you need to invent a new object format and work with delegations.

      I find it interesting that suns VM is nearly unchanged since 8 years while Microsoft tried to beat SUN and tried to make it better in some way but need to change their own VM just a year after it was published.

      angel'o'sphere

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  2. Lots of reasons why I want .NET to fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Redundant

    This note was originally published at John Munsch weblog on January the 14th.

    Lots of reasons why I want .NET to fail and fail badly

    It's benefits a criminal organization. Not one that's been found guilty of crimes once or maybe twice, but lots and lots of times. Those crimes are many and varied, but here's just a few of them: Stac Electronics v. Microsoft, DOJ v. Microsoft, Sun v. Microsoft.
    P.S. If you want to split hairs, Stac v. Microsoft isn't a criminal action, it's doesn't stem from a criminal abuse of their monopoly like the other two cases. Instead it was just a case of a small company being driven out of business by willful patent infringement, theft of trade secrets, etc.

    Microsoft isn't just one thing anymore. It's too damn big for that. I'm sure even Bill himself knows better than to think that he truly controls the whole ship because it's become big enough that he can't possibly know all the projects, people, etc. anymore. But even a really large company still has a kind of collective personality that it exudes and a large part of the personality both internal and external to Microsoft for many years now is that of a total control freak.
    If they don't own it, if they don't control it, if they didn't create it, if it doesn't have a broad stamp from Microsoft on it, then they don't want it. Sometimes it's sufficient for the thing to merely exist and they'll refuse to acknowledge it, other times they need to actively stamp it out because they can't control it.

    When was the last time you can remember Microsoft saying they supported a standard? That is, not something they invented and submitted a RFC for, an actual, take it off the shelf and re-implement it without renaming it or "improving" it so it doesn't work with anybody else standard. C++? Basic? HTML? A video or audio codec? Java? Anything?

    I'm sure there's something, somebody will point out their excellent support for TCP/IP or something and I'm sure that's true. But if you were to look at Microsoft as a person in your life, you'd wonder what was wrong with him or her such that so much had to be controlled by that person.

    When your business is selling the operating systems that 90+% of everybody uses, software development tools should not be a profit center.
    Why should I have to plunk down a couple of thousand dollars for a "universal subscription" in order to have access to compilers and basic development information? Sun doesn't have to do that? On this point I'll quote from the .NET "rebuttal" that I linked to above, "For non-profit use VS.NET can be had pretty cheaply, especially if you know anyone that is in college somewhere." Pretty cheaply? For a non-profit (that means charities, churches, universities, the hobbiest who is going to give away his work for FREE)... pretty cheaply? Wow. That is well and truly pathetic. To try and justify it, and say, oh well, you can try to scam an educational discount so it won't be so dear, is even more pathetic.

    Marketing. Have you been "lucky" enough to catch one of the .NET commercials with William H. Gacy telling you how great it is without really ever telling you anything about it? Microsoft doesn't trust .NET to stand on its own technical merits and it knows it may go like cod-liver oil down the gullets of a lot of people who have seen how the company works behind closed doors even if it were the tech shiznit.
    So they are going to pull a page out of Intel's bum-bum-buh-bum "Intel Inside" playbook and try to sell the brand like it's sneakers and cola. Trust us, you'll look cool if you use it, and we'll keep hammering the brand on TV so somebody who doesn't have much tech savvy in your organization will ask you if you are using it, or have plans to port to it, or whatever, even if he hasn't got a clue what "it" is in this case.

    They don't trust you. They don't like what they can't control and they can't control you. They can try and they always will keep trying but ultimately you are going to see them keep trying to do things and always keep a step towards the door just so they can bolt if they have to. Want to see what I mean? Go visit GotDotNet sometime if you haven't already been there. It's the grassroots community website that Microsoft put up to support .NET just in case there wasn't any grassroots community who actually wanted to do it. Or maybe just in case there was and they couldn't control it.
    Ever been to SourceForge? Of course you have, everybody has because that's one of the hubs of all open source projects. You can go there and get the source of thousands of cool open source projects and it really serves the community well. There's even hundreds of projects now that list C# among their programming languages. So why did Microsoft feel compelled to create their own GotDotNet Workspaces that is clearly just a ripoff of SourceForge?

    A few reasons are fairly clear: First, at many of their workspaces you don't get in unless they know who you are. Ever been stopped at SourceForge and asked for a name and password to look at a project? What about download binaries or source? No? At GotDotNet you will, lots of projects are marked with a lock. Second, forget about all those messy licenses that Microsoft might not approve of, you don't need to worry your little head about BSD vs. GPL vs. LGPL. You've got the one true workspace license that you have to agree to, or else you won't be putting your project there. Lastly, well it's kind of obvious, but it's really all about control isn't it. After all, if you aren't under their thumb, that has to be a bad thing. So a SourceForge that they control is pretty much a requirement, isn't it?

    It's a really sad way for a lot of people to waste a whole lot of time rebuilding that which already exists. Wouldn't the whole computing world be a lot better if there wasn't a team of people, maybe a couple of teams of people building complete copies of .NET for other platforms? If those same people were working on giving us new libraries and new tools for an already existing language instead of pouring in the thousands of man hours it's going to take to build a copy of the C# compiler or a .NET version of Ant and JUnit?

    In the end, we'll all just be left with another way to do the exact same thing only in a different language. Lord knows the world benefits now from being unable to share media between France, Germany, Italy, Spain, the US, and Japan because we can't all speak the same language. I benefit every day from the fact that I can't read a Japanese manga I might enjoy or understand a TV show from Europe. Once you are done building this tower, go build a few more right beside it using Perl, Python, and Ruby too. They're all trailing behind in certain areas, we need to make sure the same set of stuff is reinvented and rewritten for all of them too.

    1. Re:Lots of reasons why I want .NET to fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you seen the name of the guy who posted the dupe story....

      Hemos will have to find his local Wankers Annonymous and get checked in!

    2. Re:Lots of reasons why I want .NET to fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shut the hell up, you anklebiter.

      Jealous asshole.

    3. Re:Lots of reasons why I want .NET to fail by Neural+Assassin · · Score: 1

      Blah, blah, blah, blah...same old crap...blah, blah, blah... Shut the f**k up. Retard. You're self righteous, 'everybody but MS is an angel' politics are getting boring.

  3. new name by rhyd · · Score: 1

    "brought to you by project fail.NET"

    In MicroSoft Marketing speek shouldn't that be:

    "The Fail.NET Initiative"

    good work

    --
    'Be the change you want to see in the world' - Al Gore
    1. Re:new name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed:

      "The Fail.NET Initiative" it is then!

      Cheers Buddy!

      (Just 5 posts in 2 hours. This story is a slow mover even for a dupe)

  4. developers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Steve Balmer : "Hey CmdrTaco, could ya run a couple of stories on .NET every couple of days - don't worry whats in them - our astroturfers will see to the rest - those *developers* will get the message .NET is great

    CmdrTaco : "whats in it for us"

    Balmer : "Advertising $$$$$$$"

    CmdrTaco : "Sure thing steve " [aside] "We'll just post random boring stories and dupes - who'll care"

    Balmer : [aside] " developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers......."

    vote Fail.Net

  5. Re:WOOHOO! 2nd Post - highest ever position by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    when VA Linux fires all the slashdot lackeys (Q2 '03), Hemos will be assistant manager of all the janitors at the local burger king.

    LOL, but I happen to know Bill gates has already promised Hemos a high power position at the gotDotNET site in exchange for posting this story a 2nd time

  6. Okay, this is really freaking me out... by tachyonflow · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...to see my name on Slashdot for the second time in a week.

    David Simmons
    (the one not associated with SmallScript Corp.)

  7. Don't comment here by n9hmg · · Score: 1

    Let's keep them all with the original, only two-day-old posting of this same story, here. No point in getting useful comments scattered across two stories. Cool slashcode idea - track stories seen, and extend expiration to some configurable value for unseen ones. It still won't avoid the 3 hour old dupes we sometimes see (if they don't read it at all, nothing can help), but it might make it easier for the editors to catch the forgivable dupes like this one.

  8. i smell a shill by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whew!

    ok i looked back on some of your previous posts... you seem to exist just to jump into a discussion and fight Microsofts corner. The moderators are free to look at you posts and reach the same conclusion.

    The real give away however is that this is a dupe story and YOU ALREADY PARTICIPATED IN THE PREVIOUS DISCUSSION AND SAID EXACTLY THE SAME SORT OF THING :

    "oh my god, praise jeeeeezus! .net is like so great coz i can use like 15 languages.. beep beep beeeeep, bummer"

    Any genuine slashdotter would just have complained about the dupe!

    BTW java has support for over 160 languages, 158 of which were developed independantly of Sun.

    +5 informative I feel

    1. Re:i smell a shill by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Another giveaway is the name:
      SteveX
      like as in
      DirectX
      perhaps?

    2. Re:i smell a shill by SteveX · · Score: 1

      I comment on articles I feel like commenting on. I use C#/.NET so I'm probably more familiar with it than a lot of people who post here. Most of the time when I bother to respond it's because the parent said something wrong or stupid.

      I'm sure if I said something stupid about Linux I'd get a lot of people responding correcting me.. does that make them Linux shills?

      - Steve

    3. Re:i smell a shill by SteveX · · Score: 1

      Hah, I've been stevex longer than there's been a DirectX. here is some proof if you like.

    4. Re:i smell a shill by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      in that discussion you said you didn't think shareware was a good business model...

      what are your current thoughts on the GPL and the free software movement?

    5. Re:i smell a shill by SteveX · · Score: 1

      I think giving software away for free isn't a good business model. I like to write software and give it away free in my spare time, because I enjoy doing it, but I work for a company that sells proprietary software and that's what pays the bills.

      The GPL is cool but I prefer a BSD style license - I've never put any restrictions on any of the code I've personally released.

      Shareware, well, the term's not so common these days is it? I still like the idea of "pay for this software if you like it".

      A model I've been toying with is one that works like shareware except that once a predefined amount of $$ is donated, soure code is released. Ransomware, I guess - sort of like what happened with Blender, but designed that way from the start.

      A well documented API is better than access to source code in most cases anyway.

      - Steve

    6. Re:i smell a shill by SteveX · · Score: 1

      Nope. Not an MCSE either. :)

    7. Re:i smell a shill by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yum! thanks for that. Do you always feed trolls?

    8. Re:i smell a shill by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      out of curiosity:

      on a scale of 1 to 10 how ethical do you believe microsoft as a worldwide business entity is ( where 10 would be highly ethical)

      How do you feel about the demise of the Amiga and Microsofts role in indirectly preventing it from re-emerging?

    9. Re:i smell a shill by SteveX · · Score: 1

      If it amuses me to do so, yes. :)

  9. In case article gets /.ed... by BoneMarrow · · Score: 1

    ...heres a link to last weeks version...

    dupe.NET

    --
    Unfortunately, no one can be told what my sig is...
  10. If I were going to design a language... by GCP · · Score: 1

    ...I think I'd base it on the .Net framework or the Java framework. My preference would be .Net because of the genuine interest MS is taking in making it a good platform for lots of languages and the fact that, if it fit my language adequately, I'd get all those libraries, GC and other services, ASP.Net, ADO.Net, etc., all for free.

    However, the genuine interest Sun has taken in making the Java runtime available for lots of *platforms* is pretty attractive, too. If the Mono Project doesn't make it, I'd have to go with Java, but I think Mono will eventually have pretty good coverage of the platforms of interest to me.

    --
    "Those who have never entered upon scientific pursuits know not a tithe of the poetry by which they are surrounded."