Slashdot Mirror
Anders Hejlsberg on C# 3.0
spongman writes "Channel9 has a video of Anders Hejlsberg demoing C# 3.0. The new language enhancements include implicitly typed locals, extension methods, strongly-typed lambda expressions, anonymous types, and LINQ - a builtin SQL-like syntax for data access. The spec, samples and a working compiler can be found on MSDN."
But then, Bill Gates himself said that the only thing wrong with Delphi was that it wasn't a Microsoft product.
What really are the benefits that a developer gets by using C# instead of VB.NET? Either way, it's a vendor and platform lock-in, so there isn't really a portability gain. In terms of performance, the tests that I've read about haven't really shown a major advantage in favor of C#. As for functionality, C# was ahead of VB.NET in .NET 1.x, but in .NET 2.0, VB.NET has closed the gap by also allowing unsigned integers, custom operators etc.
I personally tried both, and I'm much more productive with VB.NET because I get clear keywords such as LOOP and END IF instead of braces. Theoretically, I could add comments to a brace that indicate what type of structure ends at the respective point, but that's a waste of time, and if I modify an algorithm, then the function of those closing braces may change. Also, the VB.NET editor's auto-completion feature is more advanced.
I'd really be interested in knowing other advantages that C# has, which is why I'm asking. So far it seems to me that some may be more familiar with a Java/C-style syntax (in which case I'm wondering why they don't go right for C++ or Java). Another reason may be that some people have this view that "real men don't program in BASIC".
``The built in SQL like language would be usefull in many languages.''
Yep. If done right, it can completely eliminate the possibility of SQL injections. This is something that too few people realize, but with SQL injections being a very common kind of vulnerability, it's definitely worth putting some thought and effort in.
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
C# is a nice language, but the problem is I just don't trust Microsoft anymore. From a business perspective sticking with Microsoft has proven to be a mistake.
.NET and move on to something else?
I work for a software house in London and we have a large VB6 application that has been built up over many years. VB6 has effectively been dumped by Microsoft, so our application is slowly rotting away. There is absolutely no way we can rewrite it in C# or VB.Net, we just don't have the resources. I suggested that we at least write all new components in C# and use interop, but that turned out to be a real pain, especially when trying to debug.
So what do we do? Spend a fortune rewriting our product in C# while our competitors (who may be using Java) continue to improve their products. And once we have eventually finished the rewrite, will Microsoft just dump
I have to wonder. If there had been a number of VB6 vendors, rather than just Microsoft, they could never have dumped VB6. In that situation we would have all just moved over to another vendor.
Is anyone else here in a similar situation?
They keep adding more and more stuff to the language...is there anyone that can really read all of the code that is possible to be written in C#? It sounds like a readability nightmare to me.
Heck, it took me years to learn all of the components in C++, and I'd bet that the specification for the complete language is now much smaller than C#'s. And there's still stuff waiting to be discovered on the level of template meta-programming.
Is all of the stuff they keep adding actually useful? Or is it just being added so that they can give the impression of progress, and maybe convert more people to using it? Granted, I'm excited about C++0x, but unlike what I would be thinking if I used C#, I'm not worried because I trust the standards body to not put completely unnecessary stuff into the language. What do you C# programmers think?
Thanks to some of the brilliant developers at MS, we can get some awesome stuff out of this company, like C#.
.NET down to their sinking ship, Windows.
.NET framework could be freed from Windows, and given the official blessing to target all platforms, including Linux, then Microsoft could set itself up as the supreme tools vendor for the platform. It'd be a bright future for MS, and overnight .NET would probably become the de facto standard for development on Linux!
... the stodgy petrified boys up top will always put Windows first ... to MS's undoing, no doubt.
Now, too bad management will keep on trying to tie
If only the
But no
random underscore blankspace at ya know hoo dot comedy.
Are you a newbie? That is the whole point of this website.
If you don't want to bash MS, then go to some MScentric site and wax wonderful about their propietary crapola. Some that are on the MS payroll continue to espouse the virtues of MS here (perhaps you?!), but we all enjoy how much time, money and effort MS spends trying to alter the overall message of slashdot.org.
Lesson for MS to learn: FUD doesn't effect a community of a single mind and purpose.
C# will not replace Java. It is a wonderful Java knock-off with a great IDE (Visual Studio), but it is not a Java killer.
End of rant.
/bigweenie
What gives Microsoft the right to unilaterally update the ECMA C# standard? Unless the whole ECMA standard thing was just a farce all along.
The problem is that MS strongly ties the language with the IDE.
That is, whenever C# (or Visual [anything] for that matter) gets new features, we have to buy a new version of Visual Studio to take advantage of it.
For every developer that may work on a project that will use these new features (and our developers tend to move around).
I have run into several annoying bugs and limitations in the
Now C# 3.0 comes along. Will we have to upgrade to VS 200x yet again?
With these forced upgrades, MS has effectively implemented a subscription model for their software.
Rather than allowing C# to evolve naturally, Microsoft is hoping that they can get people to buy into its intelligent design
Seriously, I've never seen anyone try to evolve a production language this quickly. They're throwing in features left and right. It's exciting! But it's also terrifying: I feel like C# is being driven at breakneck speed towards, err... I don't think Microsoft actually HAS any ultimate goal in mind for C#, as long as they can cover a lot of ground getting there.
And if you drive this fast, eventually you're going to crash, and when C# does, it will fragment into dozens of small shiny sublanguages. People will carve out their C# comfort zones containing the features they feel comfortable with and exclude the rest. Two C# programmers will no longer always speak the same "dialect," making it difficult understand each others' code.
The fact that there's a great deal of overlap among C#'s features only makes this worse. Programmer A's heavy use of generics and lambda expressions will be unfamiliar to programmer B, who never bothered to learn those features since he can accomplish the same things using implicit typing and LINQ.
And, needless to say, differing levels of compiler support will also exacerbate this problem.
I'm surprised Microsoft isn't more careful, given the cautionary example of C++. C++ is in the later stages of this disease. Large projects have to specify the C++ sublanguage dialect that they're using. And we aren't talking simple style guidelines, but the excision of large chunks of features, like RTTI and exceptions. If C# continues the way it's going, it will wind up like this.
ding! That was the sound of me reaching my metaphor limit of three per post. I guess I better end this. So to sum up:
Microsoft, you are the largest software developer and in control of the OS and development tools. You are in the unique position of being able to dictate every aspect of a new programming language. It will be used for years to come by millions of developers in all different situations. This is a blessing and a tremendous opportunity.
Don't fuck it up.
(please?)