Uh...an ActiveX control (dll/ocx) also needs to be registered and can't just be run by double clicking either.
BTW, applets are also compiled to a.class, and are only sandboxed when run inside browsers.
You can easily run ILOVEYOU type viruses in java. The issue isn't the language or anything, it's the wide availability of oo scripting engines that now ship with windows.
wasn't a big issue with unix scripts, since noone uses unix...and unix has security which current consumer operating systems don't have.
Internet Explorer will give a friendly error page, but also the complete error message (yes, including the 404 at the bottom).
IE also lets you explore FTP sites completely as if they were part of your filesystem. Unlike Netscape, it'll display ALL information the FTP site sends you (including hello message) on the left frame in explorer.
Netscape is GOD DAMN SLOW.
1) Load up slashdot in netscape. 2) Resize the window. 3) Watch netscape start and stop trying to rerender the page
1) Load up slashdot in IE. 2) Resize the window. 3) Watch the smooth as silk dynamic resizing.
And that's only one small (but important) example.
I also believe that that strategy is flawed: to me, beating Win32/COM+ into sufficient shape to work reliably and efficiently inside a safe, garbage collected language looks like a lot of work, and I think the end product would be of low quality.
They did it in J++ (Win32). And COM+ already works in a many nice safe garbage collected languages. e.g. VB, Delphi, Java, VBScript, JScript, Perlscript etc.
You idiot. I said java classes, not applets. C# is for client side and server side. Not for 'applets'..just like what Java is strong at (noone uses applets anymore).
import java.io.File;
class Idiot { public static void main(String[] args) throws IOException { new File("c:\\yousuck.mp3").delete(); } }
There's no type safety tho. If you have a Vector and you only want it to store Animals, someone could go and store Vegetables in it and you'll get a runtime cast error.
- Similar syntax to Java with some annoying, non functional differences (e.g. Uses instead of import)
Agreed, I like import and packaging in Java.
- No synchronized keyword or equivalent. This makes the language not very suitable for serverside development.
Wrong. C# has lock() which works on one statement, and also System.CriticalSection.Enter() and System.CriticalSection.Exit().
Non functional syntactic sugar. At least I don't see the advantage of having structs or enums when you can have inner classes or something similar
I was a bit annoyed too, I like it how java is really clean. However there are some differences. Structs are faster (and they mentioned it would make XML parsing more efficient). Enumerations make things safer(something static final doesn't do in Java).
No inner classes. Another usefull feature of Java.
I didn't see them, but doesn't mean they won't turn up. Has delegates which are easier to understand than anonymous inner classes.
No security model. Yet another feature that they forgot to implement. I guess you are stuck with whatever ActiveX does for you.
I think Microsoft mentioned there is a security model.
No templates. Java developers have been screaming for this feature and several third party variants of Java exist providing this highly usefull feature. It is lacking in C#.
Yes that was the first feature i looked for. Looks like Microsoft wasn't listening >:|.
Transparent use of COM objects. I suppose that is usefull but what about CORBA or JavaBeans?
Using Microsoft's JVM, you can access Java transparently as COM objects...and I'm sure you could write a CORBA ORB that is 'com-aware'..register a COM moniker called corba. var x = GetObject("corba:my.object");
No preprocessor. Apart from memory management, the preprocessor is probably the largest source of maintenance headaches so Yay!
Wrong again, there IS a preprocessor. It's detailed in the language reference.
you gain little or nothing if moving from VB
Except a nicer looking language which is a barrier that prevents C++ programmers from using VB for anything serious (for fear of being scorned).
you loose a lot if moving from either Java or C++
Like? All Java 1.1 objects can be accessed from C#. C++ programmers can convert what they wrote in C++ to COM objects and use them from C#. Looks like a good balance to me.
All C# objects are com components, so they are usable from outside C#. Why bother using it then?
Uh cause the language is nicer than VB and easier to use then C++?
Vendor lock in. Do I need to explain this?
You mean like Java? C# will become a real standard. And Microsoft will write Windows libraries for C#. Other vendors can do their own thing. This is a language. NOT A PLATFORM.
Immaturity of language. If Java is a good example of how fast language adoption goes. It will take several years for C# get mature
Yes, but remember C# already has available hundreds of thousands of com objects available for use.
It does not address the needs of Java users, C++ users or VB users.
Uh, what? Ofcourse it does.
It does not contain anything you can't find in another language.
Um, well if you want to compare it to EVERY OTHER LANGUAGE then maybe. But if you compare it to other languages one by one, I think you'll find it unique. It has features Java does not have, and features C++/C does not have. And it's easy to use.
I sincerely hope this will die quickly. I know that MS can do better. I'm waiting for news on their intentional programming project for instance. This looks like it was implemented by their marketing department.
What ever, the fact that you got so many facts wrong is an indication you didn't even bother to read the specs.
Everything is a COM object. Oh good, another language to spread viruses with! Just compile your C# program making heavy use of native calls (ANOTHER idiotic idea) and pointers, pass it around as a COM, and boom! No language designer is this stupid. It HAS to be malice on the part of MS.
And how is this different from a C binary (exe) or a Java class (class). The both have full access to the OS don't they? Yes they do. I can write a java program to delete *.mp3 just as easily as I can write a COM object to do the same thing. Yeesh.
And this is a language, not a platform, Microsoft are submitting C# to the ECMA. Microsoft will provide libraries for the.NET platform, but C# can be used with Unix type libraries etc.
No, C is a big old COMPILED text file that's transformed into something utterly different than a text file when you run it. Of *course* all code starts out as a text file, how else would a human write it, aside from coding in machine language?
Actually C is a programming language, that can be compiled - transformed into a more useful format for computers.
XML is a markup language that can be parsed - transformed into a more useful format for developers.
Look,.NET is not just about stupid monolithic servers doing everything (sun vision), it's also about a vision of the future which I've had since I was little...here's a little excerpt from bill's speech.
Let me show you how this works. (Typing.)
COMPUTER VOICE: Which index would you like?
JEFF RAINIER: (Typing.) Okay. Checking for the latest updates on that index.
COMPUTER VOICE: As of 9:10 A.M. the Dow industrial average is down minus 64 at 10,433.74.
JEFF RAINIER: Did you see how the computer asked me questions to resolve ambiguity and kind of worked with me like a person might have? That's the sort of power and intelligence that's built into the.NET platform.
Let me show you one more example. (Typing.)
COMPUTER VOICE: How long do you want to meet? (Typing.) Where do you want to meet? (Typing.) Do you need to check my schedule? (Typing.)
JEFF RAINIER: Ooh, I think my typo there caused some problems. Let me try that one more time.
COMPUTER VOICE: What would you like to do now? (Typing.) How long do you want to meet?
JEFF RAINIER: Okay, this is looking more promising. (Typing.)
COMPUTER VOICE: Where do you want to meet? (Typing.) Let me see if you are both available at this time. Okay, I've scheduled an appointment with Mark Leimberg on Friday, June 23rd at 2:00 P.M. for 30 minutes in his office.
JEFF RAINIER: Okay, you've seen how this interface works with typing, but this is much more natural and easier to use if you speak to your computer.
Imagine for a second using your cell phone to call in and get high priority mail messages, maybe make dinner reservations or even check for the latest news, all from your.NET server.
Now you see? I want to just be able to tell my computer in natural language "hey, find some time and schedule a meeting for me with joe sometime on wednesday"
That's just neat. The more the computer does for me the better. I don't need to reafirm that I know how to do repetitive tasks day in and day out just to feel cool and elite.
Gee, what ever happened to roaming profiles, Windows Terminal Services and the like? Not only is WTS faster than X, it's much easier to setup and use. My university's ITS department has a nice roaming profile setup that works fine. Students don't have their own PCs on campus you know.
Hmz, I think its kinda harsh and very arrogant to call tools like Dreamweaver "inadequate". It focusses on nothing and leaves the user completly open to do -anything- with the site that he or she wants to do. Either write code from the bottom up and look at the results or drag and drop and watch the code being added. Its your choice. So may I conclude here that this man is saying that total freedom is inadequate? Since Dreamweaver is a well known product I think its quite hard to miss it.
No, what they are talking about is building functional websites. Not about stupid basic 4 year old HTML.
Imagine buying something from amazon, choosing to have the coupon amazon gives you from the webbrowser into Money. The point is at the moment the web is (for the most part) one way, and context free. With XML, everything will have meaning.
So basicly Microsoft finally managed to grasp the idea behind Unix? I mean; c'mon.. I've been doing this kind of stuff for quite some years now. Allthough I have to admit; in a total different environment. Instead of clicking I'm entering "cd/net.priv/dave/updates" to access the computer of my friend Dave in the US and check out the latest updates he has
If you think that's the same thing, you're totally deluded.
Gee, who needs computers, I have an abacus.
It's like saying that unix has been doing COM all along, I mean, what is "|" for?
Or saying that C++ is crap cause C can do it all.
It's not just the concept, it's being able to do it PROPERLY and in a way that allows the MOST people to be able to use it. This is NOT something is good at. In fact Unix is absolutly CRAP at it.
XML is basically a big ol' delimited text file. The only things separating it from a 30-year old text file is the fact that it's hierarchical and the fact that there are parsers that let you navigate the tree structure easily.
C is basically a big ol' delimitated text file. The only things seperating it from a 60-year assembly program is the fact that it's expressive, easier to learn and there are compilers that let you write programs faster.
Uh, VBScript is an ActiveX Scripting language, it doesn't take much to write a new one.
There's already JavaScript that can be used ANYWHERE vbscript can be used.....and ActiveState also have perlscript which can be used ANYWHERE vbscript is used. This includes inside ASP, Windows Scripts, and Internet Explorer.
It appears if C# is real, it's NOT a scripting language.
I think this is an attempt to step up the maturity of ASP into a "real language".
1) This has nothing to do with an ActiveX scripting language.
2) ASP is a technology, not a language you genius. ASP provides core objects, that ANY active scripting language can access, and the ASP engine hosts the active scripting engine. Currently you can write ASP in JavaScript, VBScript and PerlScript. Most people use vbscript cause they are familiar with VB.
Slashdot Mirror
Uh...an ActiveX control (dll/ocx) also needs to be registered and can't just be run by double clicking either.
.class, and are only sandboxed when run inside browsers.
...and unix has security which current consumer operating systems don't have.
BTW, applets are also compiled to a
You can easily run ILOVEYOU type viruses in java. The issue isn't the language or anything, it's the wide availability of oo scripting engines that now ship with windows.
wasn't a big issue with unix scripts, since noone uses unix
What kind of drugs are you on?
Internet Explorer will give a friendly error page, but also the complete error message (yes, including the 404 at the bottom).
IE also lets you explore FTP sites completely as if they were part of your filesystem. Unlike Netscape, it'll display ALL information the FTP site sends you (including hello message) on the left frame in explorer.
Netscape is GOD DAMN SLOW.
1) Load up slashdot in netscape.
2) Resize the window.
3) Watch netscape start and stop trying to rerender the page
1) Load up slashdot in IE.
2) Resize the window.
3) Watch the smooth as silk dynamic resizing.
And that's only one small (but important) example.
You do realise the ILOVEYOU type worms requires the user to run it? Just like a java class.
I also believe that that strategy is flawed: to me, beating Win32/COM+ into sufficient shape to work reliably and efficiently inside a safe, garbage collected language looks like a lot of work, and I think the end product would be of low quality.
They did it in J++ (Win32). And COM+ already works in a many nice safe garbage collected languages. e.g. VB, Delphi, Java, VBScript, JScript, Perlscript etc.
so sue me ;P
You idiot. I said java classes, not applets.
C# is for client side and server side. Not for 'applets'..just like what Java is strong at (noone uses applets anymore).
import java.io.File;
class Idiot
{
public static void main(String[] args)
throws IOException
{
new File("c:\\yousuck.mp3").delete();
}
}
There's no type safety tho. If you have a Vector and you only want it to store Animals, someone could go and store Vegetables in it and you'll get a runtime cast error.
Plus casting sucks.
for i language i wrote for a cosc assignment, i implemented "exit X X" statements.
:= 0 to 100 := 0 to 100
:= 0 to 100
for i
{
for j
{
exit for 2;
};
};
you could also jump out of two if they are different.
e.g.
do
{
for i
{
exit do;
};
}
while (1);
I thought it was pretty neat...fast, and doesn't require messy labels.
This language will simultaneously offend Java developers (for lack of features)
Um, it has more features than java tho. It'll affend Java programmers cause of the new unsafe features.
and C++ developers (for lack of features and freedom). It may appeal to VB developers (ignorance is bliss).
Um, but it gives a compromise between C++ and VB and Java. Something windows developers have been screaming for for a very long time.
- Similar syntax to Java with some annoying, non functional differences (e.g. Uses instead of import)
Agreed, I like import and packaging in Java.
- No synchronized keyword or equivalent. This makes the language not very suitable for serverside development.
Wrong. C# has lock() which works on one statement, and also System.CriticalSection.Enter() and System.CriticalSection.Exit().
Non functional syntactic sugar. At least I don't see the advantage of having structs or enums when you can have inner classes or something similar
I was a bit annoyed too, I like it how java is really clean. However there are some differences. Structs are faster (and they mentioned it would make XML parsing more efficient). Enumerations make things safer(something static final doesn't do in Java).
No inner classes. Another usefull feature of Java.
I didn't see them, but doesn't mean they won't turn up. Has delegates which are easier to understand than anonymous inner classes.
No security model. Yet another feature that they forgot to implement. I guess you are stuck with whatever ActiveX does for you.
I think Microsoft mentioned there is a security model.
No templates. Java developers have been screaming for this feature and several third party variants of Java exist providing this highly usefull feature. It is lacking in C#.
Yes that was the first feature i looked for. Looks like Microsoft wasn't listening >:|.
Transparent use of COM objects. I suppose that is usefull but what about CORBA or JavaBeans?
Using Microsoft's JVM, you can access Java transparently as COM objects...and I'm sure you could write a CORBA ORB that is 'com-aware'..register a COM moniker called corba.
var x = GetObject("corba:my.object");
No preprocessor. Apart from memory management, the preprocessor is probably the largest source of maintenance headaches so Yay!
Wrong again, there IS a preprocessor. It's detailed in the language reference.
you gain little or nothing if moving from VB
Except a nicer looking language which is a barrier that prevents C++ programmers from using VB for anything serious (for fear of being scorned).
you loose a lot if moving from either Java or C++
Like? All Java 1.1 objects can be accessed from C#. C++ programmers can convert what they wrote in C++ to COM objects and use them from C#. Looks like a good balance to me.
All C# objects are com components, so they are usable from outside C#. Why bother using it then?
Uh cause the language is nicer than VB and easier to use then C++?
Vendor lock in. Do I need to explain this?
You mean like Java? C# will become a real standard. And Microsoft will write Windows libraries for C#. Other vendors can do their own thing. This is a language. NOT A PLATFORM.
Immaturity of language. If Java is a good example of how fast language adoption goes. It will take several years for C# get mature
Yes, but remember C# already has available hundreds of thousands of com objects available for use.
It does not address the needs of Java users, C++ users or VB users.
Uh, what? Ofcourse it does.
It does not contain anything you can't find in another language.
Um, well if you want to compare it to EVERY OTHER LANGUAGE then maybe. But if you compare it to other languages one by one, I think you'll find it unique. It has features Java does not have, and features C++/C does not have. And it's easy to use.
I sincerely hope this will die quickly. I know that MS can do better. I'm waiting for news on their intentional programming project for instance. This looks like it was implemented by their marketing department.
What ever, the fact that you got so many facts wrong is an indication you didn't even bother to read the specs.
Everything is a COM object. Oh good, another language to spread viruses with! Just compile your C# program making heavy use of native calls (ANOTHER idiotic idea) and pointers, pass it around as a COM, and boom! No language designer is this stupid. It HAS to be malice on the part of MS.
And how is this different from a C binary (exe) or a Java class (class). The both have full access to the OS don't they? Yes they do. I can write a java program to delete *.mp3 just as easily as I can write a COM object to do the same thing. Yeesh.
And this is a language, not a platform, Microsoft are submitting C# to the ECMA. Microsoft will provide libraries for the
Yes, but Microsoft is taking this straight to the ECMA.
I seem to remember something like that not happening with Sun...and when it finally did, they pulled out.
Geee.
WTS IS faster than X.
I works great over a 19.2kbps connection. Normal X does not.
Most Unix guys I've talked to agree as well.
Uh.
Well, so we'll solve those problems, get computers to work out who's talking to it (using vision etc as well).
Secondly, it's useful, imagine driving in your car and being able to talk to it in natural language like that.
What are you IDIOTs so eager to diss this kind of COOL technology?
Does it really make you feel superior to the rest of society that you know something they don't?
I don't care at all, I know I know lots about computers, but I want computers to be intelligent.
Should be ultimate goal of computer scientists.
No, C is a big old COMPILED text file that's transformed into something utterly different than a text file when you run it. Of *course* all code starts out as a text file, how else would a human write it, aside from coding in machine language?
Actually C is a programming language, that can be compiled - transformed into a more useful format for computers.
XML is a markup language that can be parsed - transformed into a more useful format for developers.
Look, .NET is not just about stupid monolithic servers doing everything (sun vision), it's also about a vision of the future which I've had since I was little...here's a little excerpt from bill's speech.
.NET platform.
.NET server.
Let me show you how this works. (Typing.)
COMPUTER VOICE: Which index would you like?
JEFF RAINIER: (Typing.) Okay. Checking for the latest updates on that index.
COMPUTER VOICE: As of 9:10 A.M. the Dow industrial average is down minus 64 at 10,433.74.
JEFF RAINIER: Did you see how the computer asked me questions to resolve ambiguity and kind of worked with me like a person might have? That's the sort of power and intelligence that's built into the
Let me show you one more example. (Typing.)
COMPUTER VOICE: How long do you want to meet? (Typing.) Where do you want to meet? (Typing.) Do you need to check my schedule? (Typing.)
JEFF RAINIER: Ooh, I think my typo there caused some problems. Let me try that one more time.
COMPUTER VOICE: What would you like to do now? (Typing.) How long do you want to meet?
JEFF RAINIER: Okay, this is looking more promising. (Typing.)
COMPUTER VOICE: Where do you want to meet? (Typing.) Let me see if you are both available at this time. Okay, I've scheduled an appointment with Mark Leimberg on Friday, June 23rd at 2:00 P.M. for 30 minutes in his office.
JEFF RAINIER: Okay, you've seen how this interface works with typing, but this is much more natural and easier to use if you speak to your computer.
Imagine for a second using your cell phone to call in and get high priority mail messages, maybe make dinner reservations or even check for the latest news, all from your
Now you see? I want to just be able to tell my computer in natural language "hey, find some time and schedule a meeting for me with joe sometime on wednesday"
That's just neat. The more the computer does for me the better. I don't need to reafirm that I know how to do repetitive tasks day in and day out just to feel cool and elite.
Gee, what ever happened to roaming profiles, Windows Terminal Services and the like? Not only is WTS faster than X, it's much easier to setup and use. My university's ITS department has a nice roaming profile setup that works fine. Students don't have their own PCs on campus you know.
Uh, and you think Microsoft employees can't log into any system and have full access to their own email etc?
duh. it's obvious this is different.
Hmz, I think its kinda harsh and very arrogant to call tools like Dreamweaver "inadequate". It focusses on nothing and leaves the user completly open to do -anything- with the site that he or she wants to do. Either write code from the bottom up and look at the results or drag and drop and watch the code being added. Its your choice. So may I conclude here that this man is saying that total freedom is inadequate? Since Dreamweaver is a well known product I think its quite hard to miss it.
No, what they are talking about is building functional websites. Not about stupid basic 4 year old HTML.
Imagine buying something from amazon, choosing to have the coupon amazon gives you from the webbrowser into Money. The point is at the moment the web is (for the most part) one way, and context free. With XML, everything will have meaning.
So basicly Microsoft finally managed to grasp the idea behind Unix? I mean; c'mon.. I've been doing this kind of stuff for quite some years now. Allthough I have to admit; in a total different environment. Instead of clicking I'm entering "cd
If you think that's the same thing, you're totally deluded.
Gee, who needs computers, I have an abacus.
It's like saying that unix has been doing COM all along, I mean, what is "|" for?
Or saying that C++ is crap cause C can do it all.
It's not just the concept, it's being able to do it PROPERLY and in a way that allows the MOST people to be able to use it. This is NOT something is good at. In fact Unix is absolutly CRAP at it.
XML is basically a big ol' delimited text file. The only things separating it from a 30-year old text file is the fact that it's hierarchical and the fact that there are parsers that let you navigate the tree structure easily.
C is basically a big ol' delimitated text file. The only things seperating it from a 60-year assembly program is the fact that it's expressive, easier to learn and there are compilers that let you write programs faster.
Well, what about #import?
That's 'proprietry', but it's DAMN useful.
su comes with the reskit.
If you don't like it. Don't use it.
I personally love the idea of reducing the redundant tasks C++ COM programmers have to go thru.
Uh, VBScript is an ActiveX Scripting language, it doesn't take much to write a new one.
There's already JavaScript that can be used ANYWHERE vbscript can be used.....and ActiveState also have perlscript which can be used ANYWHERE vbscript is used. This includes inside ASP, Windows Scripts, and Internet Explorer.
It appears if C# is real, it's NOT a scripting language.
I think this is an attempt to step up the maturity of ASP into a "real language".
1) This has nothing to do with an ActiveX scripting language.
2) ASP is a technology, not a language you genius. ASP provides core objects, that ANY active scripting language can access, and the ASP engine hosts the active scripting engine. Currently you can write ASP in JavaScript, VBScript and PerlScript. Most people use vbscript cause they are familiar with VB.