Does C# Measure Up?

An anonymous reader queries: "Windows::Developer is offering a detailed, quantitative examination [free login required] of C#'s performance versus Java, C, C++ and D. 'Overall the results were surprising, although perhaps unexciting, in showing that C# (and to a less extent Java) is, to a good degree, on a par in efficiency terms with its older and (presumed to be) more efficient counterparts C and C++ at least as far as the basic language features compared in this analysis are concerned,' writes the author, Matthew Wilson. I'm only an amateur coder, and confess to not understanding most of the two-part article. I'd love to hear how true programmers view his results, which are too wide-ranging to summarize easily here. How about it Slashdot, as this special edition asks, 'Can C# keep up with compiled languages like C, C++, and D or byte-code based Java?'"

While we're on the topic of C#, rnd() queries: "It's been a while now, since Mono and DotGnu have begun eroding the market power of Microsoft by creating open source implementations of C# and the Common Language Runtime. Over the weekend I loaded Mono and did some informal benchmarking of object creation, intensive message passing, massive iteration, etc., and the results show that Mono is about 90% as fast as Microsoft's implementation after a very short time. I now want to switch my .NET development over to Linux/Mono exclusively, but I want to first settle on a free alternative to Visual Studio .NET 2003. Any suggestions?"

Comments

Why do we need C# in the first place?

[Anonymous Coward]

When i first heard about C# i thought "Why is M$ making it's own language in the first place?" Then I thought i'd give it a try and I pretty much said "if there is nothing extrordinary about this lanugage then it's pretty much useless. C# would have to be something really great to replace C++ or Objective-C for me.

So i dove into C# and found nothing extrordinary about it. If nothing else it looked like a confusing mix of C++, Java & basic. Well i've been wrong before so i asked my teachers after a meeting with industry bussinesses and their opinion was that "most developers don't want to learn another language just to learn another language that does not offer great benifets." They further said that it most peoples opinion they asked about C#/.NET it has had the exact oposite effect that M$ thought it'd have.

I'd hate to say it but this is clearly M$ making it's own version of something JUST to have it's own version of it. Wake up people!

Re:Why do we need C# in the first place?

[spiro_killglance]

Agree %100 percent, if i had mod
points, i'd mod the above up.

But theres one more reason he missed
not to use C#, and that is of course.
That using C# means trusting microsoft,
and i trust microsoft about as far as
i could comfutably split out a rat.

Re:Why did MS move to C++ in the first place?

[EmbeddedJanitor]

MS bought Lattice C back in 1983 or so. This came on two single-density 5.25 inch floppies. You could copy the whole lot onto a single double-density (360kB floppy) with room left for an editor. With a dual floppy system you were in heaven with the second drive for source etc.

Back them, Microsoft viewed MSDOS as the single-user front end and Unix as the server/backend. Being multi-platfrm and portable was of benefit. I don't think MS pushed for C or C++, rather they were lead there by existing code and compilers which they subsequently destroyed and ruined platform nuetrality with their class libraries etc. Now by pushing C# they improve their lock-in, not just to applications but also to the Microsoft back-end services etc.

Windows Developer Website

[codepunk]

Why would create a free account on the Windows Developer Website. Hell you can get the same effect by visiting the goatse.cx website.