Slashdot Mirror
How C# Was Made
prostoalex writes "Bruce Eckel (from the Thinking in C++/Java/Patterns/Enterprise Java fame) and Bill Venners have interviewed programming legend Anders Hejlsberg. After 13 years in Borland and joining Microsoft in 1996, Hejlsberg now leads the development of C# language and talks about the development process, reasons some things exist in C# and some not, as well as future directions."
I don't know why Java developers always feel the need to point out that C# took a lot of ideas from Java. I don't see C++ developers always pointing out that Java's mandate was to "co-opt" C++. Of course C# took a lot of ideas from Java (I don't think Microsoft has ever denied this), because Java got a lot of things right. C# also made a lot of improvements (event handling is MUCH improved in C# for example) and is a great language to program in. I think it would be even better if there were a .NET runtime for an OS other than Windows, but the good people on the Mono project are working on that already.
It's well known that the C# designers paid a lot of attention to Java, but more importantly, it's also quite clear that they also spent a lot of time paying attention to the experience of developing in Java.
So while I might not entirely agree with the uncaught exceptions or the way methods aren't virtual by default, I do think it would be a good idea for Sun to take the lesson from MS, and take what is best about C# and move it into Java.
In a sense, Java was designed to co-opt C++. But co-optinging C++ was not made as a business decision to lock in Sun customers, it was made as part of Sun's vision of "The Net is the Computer" (or whatever they called it).
Sun embraced the internet years before Microsoft and looked out into the future and realized that desktop computing and huge, standalone applications were going to be increasingly replaced by device computing and small, internet downloadable applications would be prevalant.
To that end, they tried to design a language that was simple, that had built-in libraries to handle basic internet protocols and to a large extent, their vision was spot-on and Java was hugely successful.
Without Microsoft spending years trying to undercut them it's very conceivable that Java would be the lingua-franca of the internet right now.
-- You see, there would be these conclusions that you could jump to
Fine with me. A java-like language that doesn't gobble ram like no tomorrow? Sounds good.
As a bonus, Gtk# has the best API I've ever used in a gui toolkit.
It seems to me that big companies like Sun and Microsoft like pseudo-compiled languages like Java and those in
1) Pseudo-compiled languages are easily decompiled. If a small competitor writes an especially useful program, it is easy to see the logic by just decompiling the source code. In business programming, the business systems logic can be EXTREMELY complicated. It's easier to copy it from a competitor who has proven success. See these links for information about decompilation. Of course, the best methods of decompilation are not made public:
Java Decompilers
A friend wrote this:
"I regularly use decompilers for Java classes. The last library I decompiled is TupleSpace from IBM, a library for network communication (useful if doing clustering). The result was of a shocking clarity.
"That was especially easy because the code had few local variables (in the bytecode, local variables have an identifier that is a number) and no obfuscation."
2) Pseudo-compiled languages are slower. That raises the cost of hardware. Sun makes most of its money from selling hardware. Slower software requires more expensive hardware. Microsoft makes most of its money selling operating systems. The customers most important to Microsoft are not you and I. Microsoft's important customers are the systems builders like Dell and HP. Systems builders want slow software so they can sell more hardware. Microsoft wants slow software so people buy more systems and therefore more operating systems licenses.
What are you talking about? Nobody uses java for "internet downloadable applications", or even intranet downloadable ones. Their vision of thin-client computing was shown to be a pipe dream, to everyone except you anyway.
...wearing a skin-tight topless leather jumpsuit, with cutaway buttocks and transparent crotch panel.
That C# takes ideas from java is irrelevant.
Maybe you like C#, maybe you don't. maybe it's useful for your project, maybe it's not. Those are side issues -- its role as a tool is secondary.
DotNet performs the task for which it was designed very well. That task is, of course, to contain programming talent and effort within the Windows world. That DotNet better than VB and Win32 is fundamentally a testament to how awful VB and Win32 are.
I'm not bagging C# or DotNet on their technical merits. They are not bed in that respect. But C# and DotNet's utility as development tools for Windows are only secondary to their utility as a means for maintaining Microsoft's control of the market.
C# and DotNet are beautiful Gates on the prison of the computing world.
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
Java was designed to co-opt Smalltalk, or at least Sun brand it and bring it up to date.
Think about it... Smalltalk's main points were the single root object heirarchy, the bytecode compilation, and the large runtime library including full GUI. Did C++ have this? No. It was more "object oriented concepts ported to C" - lean and mean, machine dependant and no standard GUI. The C++ generics and the STL weren't standard when Java arrived.
Does my bum look big in this?
real enumerations, like C#
real attributes and program metadata, like C#
real foreach, like C#
generics, like the next version of C#
Face it, if C# borrows from Java, the next release of Java is a ripoff of C#.
This is my sig.
In many cases, pseudo-compiled languages, or languages that use a VM are a better choice. No worrying about memory management, buffer overflows, etc.
There will always be a place for C and C++ in places where you *NEED* low-level control over things like memory management, or where performance is very critical. But for most applications, this is simply not the case. You want a language that can do all you need it to do, and you don't want to worry about the rest of the details. Java and C#/.Net are the next big thing in commercial programming. But they certainly won't be the last. There will be another language that is better in 10 years from now. But right now it is a good thing that we have two choices, instead of one. Competition is a *good* thing.
Well, pseudo-compiled languages is hardly a "big company" thing. Look at Python for instance. It's all over the place (in the open source world).
I remember when legal used to mean lawful, now it means some kind of loophole. - Leo Kessler
But people DO say that Java was co-opted C++, including you and now .. me. Languages naturally progress from those that already exists like every other technology. Why reinvent the wheel and find out that squares don't work... over and over.
.NET runtime concept that works so much better than Java on a Windows machine is something that could exist for Java some day. C# might actually have a legitimately supported OS other that Windows, and although the Mono project is great, it ain't by MS.
... then another will come along.
Java is taking ideas from C# as well, just take a look at 1.5 with enums, yes I know they existed before C# but I think their existence in C# prompted the move.
I just find it funny that pro-MS people often don't like to hear that C# could even possibly be an evolutionary step off of Java. And unlike older languages, Java itself is still evolving. The
I've used both and the both work and they'll both change... for a while
I wounldn't try to find religion in a programming language, they come and go too quickly.
> it is easy to see the logic by just
> decompiling the source code.
You mean bytecode, probably.
> the business systems logic can be
> EXTREMELY complicated
If it's that complicated, having a bunch of decompiled source code is not going to be that useful. You're better off programming it yourself so you understand it and can change it when you need to.
> Pseudo-compiled languages are slower.
But not _much_ slower. A $3K dual CPU Linux server can serve up a lot of Tomcat hits. Need more? Buy a load-balancer and a few more servers. Not a big deal.
The Army reading list
why trust your development to a language designed to lock you in to Windows? C#, for all its niceities is just a way of getting you to buy more Windows 2003 Server licenses.
Your 4.5 is wrong, and even in a world in which it made sense, it'd still be wrong. Sun's whole marketing mantra around Java was "Write Once. Run Anywhere." Allowing platform-specific extensions would break that, so it's an obvious non-starter. Sun's reaction wasn't correct, but it was an allowable one.
.NET is usable, but Java is something horrific.
.NET-bashers never get modded down but anyone who dislikes Java goes to karma hell, LOL...
I wonder why
Your comment is a fascinating insight into a fanatical mind. You may not yet be as bad as the guy that lives on the corner of my block, with the foil under his NY Yankees basball cap, but the distinction is small.
You've esentially said C# and
Wonderfull logic.
Your prison/Gates metaphor-pun is wonderfully melodramatic as well.
Thanks for play,
-Malakai
A Dragon Lives in my Garage
just take a look at 1.5 with enums, yes I know they existed before C# but I think their existence in C# prompted the move.
Uh, no. Enums' existence in ansi C and C++ prompted the move, given the large number of developers who work in both C/C++ and java, who know from real-world experience that enums improve maintainability and reliability of code.
Remain calm! All is well!
Programming can be fun again. Film at 11.
But say it was. Who cares? Every language is based to some extent on what came before it. The question is, does it improve on other languages? Does it have a niche that it serves better than other options?
In this case, the answer is yes. Java is horrible kludgy in a lot of ways, and yes, it's horribly slow for large applications (although, small benchmarks can hide it's slowness). And no, I don't want to debate yet again the merits of Java. I think it sucks. If you think otherwise, more power to you. I'm glad it works for you.
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
most serious C# drawback is that it doesn't have (and probbably will never have) so rich and wide open source community like Java does (Apache group, Object Web group and many many many more...).
:-))
Each tiny crappy component, each crappy lib for C# out there on the net is sold, and sometimes for outrageous prices (a month ago seached for a plugin to generate properties from variables - something like getter/setter generator macros, so common in most Java IDEs - found it for 100$ per seat! OMG!). there is no idea of sharing, neither the source nor experience, and this IMHO will be the main cause of C# setback.
And oh, most computer literate people pronouce '#' as 'hash', not 'sharp'
The truth is - existing software quality sucks. There are a few exceptions, but there are too many poor quality products being shipped everyday sometimes costing millions of dollars. The fault is seldom with the tools or the language of choice.
There are so many parts of the whole software development process that needs to be improved. With the right process, people and management it is possible to make great software regardless of the language.
When automobile engineers argue, do they argue about the quality of their cars, their features and design or do they childishly bicker about which wrench is better?
All your favorite sites in one place!
Yeah, but Java existed because Sun wanted to have control, and was simply an attempted coup to sieze control from Microsoft. The Apple Mac existed because Apple wanted to control desktop computing.
Most companies want to dominate the market. The difference is that for the vast majority of them, market domination is a ludicrous concept.
Your comment is a fascinating insight into a fanatical mind.
.NET have, they do not override the fact that the language and framework are under the control of Microsoft. All the people bitching at Sun's control of Java seem to just look the other way when .NET is mentioned. Who gives a rip that they've submitted it to some standards committee? Do you think Microsoft can't "embrace and extend" .NET? Do you think they don't have several dozen submarine patents ready to go?
.NET on any other platform besides Windows. I can take a Java app developed on Windows and run it on Linux, FreeBSD and Solaris. I cannot do the same for *ANY* .NET application.
.NET is one tool they are using to accomplish this.
Fanatical no. Cynicism spawned actions of Microsoft? Maybe.
Despite whatever wonderful attributes C# and
I'll believe the hype when I see a workable, usable, and complete implementation of
Microsoft wants developer writing Windows-only applications.
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
Personally, I like the 'new' keyword. It makes it very clear where an object is being instantiated, and not just assigned through a function (that's what var = Type(args) looks like to me).
Also, C# allows the core types to be allocated on the stack. Here is a line I pulled from my code:
byte* buffer = stackalloc byte[256];
stackalloc can only be used inside an unsafe context.
Well, if you're a Java programmer worth your salt, you DON'T propagate every exception class the underlying modules might want to throw. You make your code catch exceptions rising from below and either handle them or massage them into the exception set your module exports. This is much better for the upper-level users because they want to deal only with situations raised by, and meaningful for, the APIs at hand, and they don't have to care about what would brew beneath.
If you don't want to lose exception stack information, as of J2SE 1.4, you can chain an original exception to your higher-level exception, so that everything would be rolled down nicely in a trace printout.
My exception safety is -fno-exceptions.
You would then have something like this in Java:
Type myType = Type.new(); //invokes Type's static new() method
And of course you should feel free to override the implementation of new(), just like you would do it in any constructor. No more need for messy super()... Oh but static methods in Java can't inherit behavior? Because classes aren't considered as objects? Doh! How very object-oriented... (end of sarcasm)
In any true object-oriented language, you should be able to write almost everything as object.method(argument), and this is not the case with Java unfortunately...
"In our tactical decisions, we are operating contrary to our strategic interest."
most serious C# drawback is that it doesn't have (and probbably will never have) so rich and wide open source community like Java does (Apache group, Object Web group and many many many more...)
.NET components. .NET and C# are two entirely different things. There is a lot of open source C# software out there (check go-mono.com).
.NET APIs implemented, and, additionally already has a complete set of open source toolkits and libraries, with APIs that, unlike the Java stuff, are already familiar to existing open source programmers.
It is true that there is more open source server-side web stuff for Java than there is for C#. But, against that, you have to hold that C# actually has a full-featured, high-performance, compatible open source implementation. Also, you can get a full-featured, open-source, widely-used GUI toolkit for C#, namely Gtk#.
And all that open source Java stuff doesn't really matter as long as Sun owns key parts of the platform (e.g., the Swing implementation). Yes, you can exchange open source Java libraries all you want, but Sun has ultimate control.
Each tiny crappy component, each crappy lib for C# out there on the net is sold,
No, it isn't. You are thinking
What you should really be asking if you are interested in open source is: if I only use open source tools, how do the two software platforms compare? And if you only use open source tools, Java looks like a pretty sad platform: you can choose between Kaffe, orp, and gcj as runtimes, but none of them are anywhere near complete and most open source Java libraries don't run on them. You can't even get a working open source Swing implementation. In comparison, C# is much further along: Mono has a lot of the
I found this particular statement from Anders insightful. Just because he and his peers are not aware of CORBA systems scaling to geo-scale, they assume it can't. Although anders and his co-workers are experts in language design and building compilers, they are obvious detached from the world of application development. The requirements of application development are seldom as clear cut as designing a language.
Most of the top 20 financial firms use CORBA and other ORB drivers to handle geo-scale applications. I believe anders needs to get out into application development and spend about 10 years in the field. Once he does, he will realize CORBA is there for a reason. The simplistic examples and views of anders definitely provides insight into many of .NET's short coming with handling complex processes. Doing distributed objects is because large institutions have to integrate with numerous systems. Handling that in a transactional manner isn't appropriate in a stateless Webservice or simple SOAP. what you really want is data + behavior. Just the values isn't enough to know what else to do in case a process fails.
I can't help but feel microsoft and .NET have taken a huge step back in terms of getting into enterprise backend applications. Trying to update data in multiple database isn't easy and never will be. Forcing webservices on these types of applications if foolish and doomed to failure.