Slashdot Mirror
Public Standards: C# 2, Java 0
TheAncientHacker writes "While Java coders wait for SUN to be willing to accept any public standards for the Java language and runtime, Microsoft's C# and its underlying CLI, already standardized by ECMA, are about to get a second certification. This time by by the granddaddy of certification groups, the ISO."
Ever heard of Mono? Ever heard of Apache.Net? You need to do some more homework....MS only implemented .Net on their platform, but other groups are doing so on other platforms.
Spoken like a MS hater who isn't familiar with the products.
.NET framework has been available for Win 2k and XP for some time, and VS.net has been advertised right here on slashdot forever. .NET server was renamed Windows 2003 because it was confusing people like you.
.NET only works on Win 2003 is like saying Java only works on Solaris.
The
A language is not an operating system. Saying
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Don't forget Rotor - the shared source CLI - Rotor's license is for non-commercial use only, but its license doesn't taint your skills, so you can learn off of Rotor and make your own GNU/GPL implementation.
That isn't so bad now is it.
Not true.. Kaffe has been around for a long time.. Blackdown has had their Java VM for a while too. Those are just two open source ones off the top of my head.
Other VMs include IBM's.. very good quality and speed there. Its free, but not open source. Even Microsoft has their VM, though its not worth much anymore.
How does Sun have the only JVM again?
Which it is, or might as well be. Until gcj came along (and it's not there yet) there were no free implementations of Java, and any development you did could at any time have been razed had Sun decided not to give their JVM away for free.
Ummm...Blackdown?
My journal has hot
glossed over and ignored to this point in both projects. Just because Microsoft has cut both off at the legs yet doesn't mean that they can't and won't.
blackdown is proprietary.
True.. I agree in general with Kaffe, though I will say its better than it used to be.
a mm ing/Languages/Java/Implementations/?il=1
Blackdown is a port.. but managed in an open process and environment.
IBM's is certainly proprietary.. but that wasn't the complaint. The issue was a non-SUN JVM.. and IBM gives that to you.
Here is a google category
http://directory.google.com/Top/Computers/Progr
This lists many different JVM's available.. some open source.. some commercial. If you want a non-SUN JVM.. go to town.
Have you heard the phrase by critics "Write once port everywhere"?
Sun is afraid of vendor lock in creating incompatible libraries that would result in proving Microsoft and the critics right when stating that java isn't portable. Today java is dead on the client so this issue is not as important. If java took off on the internet for client apps and then each vendor had their own libraries the result would be catastrophic.
The situation has improved recently and its mostly portable now but it has hurt sun. Sun is in an odd situation. They can release it and watch as vendors create proprietary extensions or keep it and hope more people use it.
http://saveie6.com/
Blackdown isn't a free implementation, it's a port of Sun's JVM to Linux. It bears the same license.
Hey, have a look over at JCP.org.
There's 922 JSR's there, all public standards underway that anyone (that includes YOU and ME) can comment on. Where can I go to comment on the C# standards underway?
So, which is the more open standard?
What a maroon. (Yes, I did spell that right).
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Actually, Microsoft did release another .NET runtime called Rotor. It's shared-source and cross-platform. They made the implementation run on FreeBSD.
http://www.go-mono.com/winforms.html
way to research your claims.
Agreed. MS is hiding several parts of .NET, providing an open standard only for a handful of low level components. I have ECMA standard 335 (or is it 355), the standard for CLI and CLR, and it really doesn't cover much at all.
It certainly doesn't cover WinForms, so good luck seeing portability for GUI applications written in VS.NET!
Open standards are nice, but played the right way, are bullocks. In this case, Microsoft has decided to include all sorts of references and links to non-standard APIs and libraries, and they are under no obligation to release them. I have reason to suspect, too, that a third party who replicates the behavior of something like WinForms in their own .NET implementation (without MS permission) would find themselves on the business end of charges of reverse-engineering.
Of course, this can make for a delicious "Tower of Babel" situation as other parties (Mono, etc) start creating their own APIs to fill in the gap between the ECMA standard and what's needed to get things done. The only difference is that the Mono libraries for their APIs will probably be available for a Windows port (if they're not 100% MSIL code already), whereas MS' APIs won't be.
I beg to differ you idiot. Before posting so authoritatively why don't you do some homework? While its hard to find concrete evidence that shows which language has market dominance, there are some hints out there:
Doing a search for jobs here will show you that there are 4268 jobs with "Java" in their descriptions with only 366 jobs matching "C#" and 17 jobs matching ".NET"
This shows a graph of the languages in use on sourceforge.
Oh yeah clown? The only thing "stunning" here is your lunacy. Why don't you go take a look at the bookstore and search "Java Programming" then ".NET programming?" I get 601 books for .NET and 1463 for Java. That is over 2x more books for Java.
What bothers me even more than Microsoft's shitty products and nonexistant business ethics is that they have a slew of retarded users who can't provide even a shred of supporting evidence to back the claims they make. Its always stupid shit like "I use MS because no one ever got fired for it" or, "... because fonts look ugly in X". In this case you have an guy pulling shit out of ass that is not even true.
What in the hell was it in his post that prompted you to mod him up so much SlashdotXP?
Furthermore, Java has been around for a while longer than C# so more support would be natural. That will change soon though as C# is widely regarded as a much better language.
Those particular components that you mention (Type) are part of the ECMA and ISO standard efforts.
So in fact the submission covers C#, a set of base class libraries and a potential execution environment (you can compile to native code if you choose instead)
Miguel
Microsoft's shared source implementation works on FreeBSD and MacOS X. It has been ported by third parties to Linux.
On the positive side, there is this kick-ass project called Mono that implements it, and runs on a variety of other systems as well.
Meanwhile, Linux isn't "officially" UNIX or even POSIX-certified
The Unifix Linux distribution is certified as POSIX.1 conforming.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Interix and the native NT4 posix layer are completely different things.
Interix is indeed fully posix compliant and you are actually more likely to get a posix program to compile under it than under cygwin. For more information including a free 120 day trial version go to...
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/sfu/
obDisclaimer:
Why yes I do work for Microsoft, and yes I even work in that part of Microsoft.
Hm, garbage collection is a non-feature. You can do it in C++ (and it works just fine as long as you avoid C-style code), but it doesn't fit with the "C++ way of doing things." The preferred way of doing things in C++ is to use smart pointers that do reference counting. It's not any better or worse, just different.
Java and C# interfaces are basically just restricted multiple-inheritence implementations. You can argue all you want about whether MI is good, but can you do something with interfaces that you can't with abstract base classes?
Events can be implemented very cleanly without language support, as in libsigc++. The recent comparison of libsigc++ to C# delegates (search OSNews) showed that even though libsigc++ is an out-of-language feature, it is comparable in power and ease of use to delegates.
The only real thing C++ is missing is introspection and reflection. Not important for most code, but for some stuff (transparent serialization) it's crucial. Hopefully, this will be one of the things addressed in the C++ 0x standard.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
They're targetting education. From what I've seen, Math and CS departments are really keen on languages being standardized before they'll add it to the curriculum.
At least at my school, we were late in getting on the Java bandwagon, and still have only grudgingly accepted it as a "slightly cleaner C++", which I strongly object to(since Javva is most definitely not C++).
If C# has the standards going for it, plus the blessing of Microsoft, and looks more like C++ than Java, it'll supplant Java quickly in academic settings, which buys Microsoft greater control over the cycle*.
* Schools teach what's in demand, and businesses look to colleges to see what knowledgeable people are using.