Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Public Standards: C# 2, Java 0

Posted by timothy on from the fast-track-authority dept.

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."

6 of 459 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Standards? by LanikMueller · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.

  2. Re:Platforms C# works on by stratjakt · · Score: 5, Informative

    Spoken like a MS hater who isn't familiar with the products.

    The .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.

    A language is not an operating system. Saying .NET only works on Win 2003 is like saying Java only works on Solaris.

    --
    I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
  3. Re:What's up Sun??!! by MSG · · Score: 4, Informative

    Blackdown isn't a free implementation, it's a port of Sun's JVM to Linux. It bears the same license.

  4. Try Java 922, C# 2.... by SuperKendall · · Score: 5, Informative

    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
  5. Re:This is somewhat of a smoke screen.. by Caoch93 · · Score: 4, Informative
    So, you have to differentiate between a baseline CLR environment, and the actual programming APIs that would be used to build on top of this. .NET is not the CLR.. .NET is the CLR, APIs, Libraries, and so forth.. therefore only a small part of the environment is open.

    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.

  6. Re:What's up Sun??!! by miguel · · Score: 4, Informative

    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