Writing a compiler that targets.NET IL (i.e. the knock off of java bytecode) doesn't make it less C# like
This is correct.
For example, Java has Clojure, which is functional and vert different from Java. But the compiler writer had to jump through hoops to get the clojure code compiled into something Java like.
Interesting. The Java VM is essentially a stack-based execution environment, not fundamentally different from a CPU as such. I don't know why it would be significantly easier to translate Clojure to CPU instructions (which it has to end up at at the end of the day) than bytecode. I assume that it would be because Clojure typically runs on a very language-specific VM, and fitting it onto the JVM without adding the Clojure VM on top would be harder.
Again, you claim that the CIL is C# centric. I would love to see an example. What specifically about this stack-based execution environment is C# centric?
Sigh. I wish you would turn on your brain. Java and COBOL has very little in common language-wise, but both are legacy enterprise languages that have been passed by younger, more nimble, and evolution-ready languages like Python, Ruby, SCALA and yes, indeed, C# (no comparison with the other mentioned languages though). Sun made many mistakes with Java, the worst was the insistence on maintaining VM compatibility.
Not true. They are also enterprise programming languages with an enormous amount of legacy software written in them. They are also quite slow to evolve and have not properly incorporated any newer language constructs since their inception. They are both what you would call dinosaurs, but Java is a little less close to extinction.
Sadly there are no good signs on the horizon for Java evolution. I find it sad since I used to do a lot of work in Java. It has gone stale though. Long before Oracle bought Sun. They botched generics in a bad way, they implemented auto-boxing in an absurd way. The entire focus was on maintaining backwards (forwards in reality) compatibility in the JVM. That was, and is still, a major mistake.
Sigh. I'd like you to take a crash course in discussion too. You are the one with the statement, you're the one who would have to back something up. It is, as you should know if you had a brain, not possible to prove a negative. Now, a couple of pointers as to how and why.NET is no longer heavily tied to C#, take a look at what has been added to.NET for F# for example, and also all the work that has gone into the dynamic language aspect of.NET since last you were out of your mom's basement, I guess some times around 2002.
Most of what is not on Express is C++ related. For C#, Express is mostly OK. Couple with Git and a few other things, and you have a nice environment. I could not live without remote debugging, but most developers can.
You are almost correct. Java has been around a lot longer than C#, but it hasn't been properly maintained (maintenance through committee never works) and it is therefore lagging quite significantly behind C# today. Generics is a joke. Autoboxing is a bad idea gone wrong. The VM desperately needs an overhaul with regards to supporting modern technologies (dynamic languages and language concepts for example are significantly faster on the Microsoft VM than on Java). Java is COBOL. Sad but true. Sad because I used to love Java. I was part of a team that brought one of the earliest commercial apps to market on Java. Java's been terminally ill though, since long before Oracle got involved.
Wow. You really are quite clueless, are you not? Mono on Android, for example, beats the crap out of Java on Dalvik. On other Linux flavors, the story is much the same..NET is mature and fast, and has great tools and library support (most of what you can find for Java is also available for.NET) and runs not quite as many places as Java, but that is mostly a concern if you are doing embedded development.
Yes, and you have not been outside of your own head since 2002? C# is what Java desires to be but can't decide how to accomplish.
It's not Ruby, but it is as close as you can get among the bigger programming languages. COBOL is COBOL, even if they insist on calling it "Java" these days.
Sorry, you and the blogger you refer to are just stuck in a mid-1990s programming model, one that WPF actively discourages by being a pain in the rear to work with if you use said programming model.
WPF allows for a very clean separation of concerns, it actively encourages good design patterns such as (some would argue against) MVP, MVVM etc. Yes, there is a learning curve, but for a team developing apps that are to stay alive for years and years, WPF makes all other heavy client programming seem like it is rooted in the late crestateous. Is it perfect? No way, but it is improving, particularly now that tooling is making things easier (with the ability to debug bindings in VS2 for example.
Spend some time with Ruby, do some Rails or Sinatra stuff. Go through an entire project where you write your tests before your code, and then you will see what MS is doing with WPF.
Think about it, you can test every aspect of your GUI in code. Easily. You can click buttons, make sure the correct things show up/vanish/are enabled/disabled etc without ever showing the GUI at all.
Here is a tip, if you are writing C# code in your WPF project you are doing it wrong. If you write code-behind, you are doing it wrong. If you do any GUI related work outside of your View Model, you are probably doing it wrong (*)
*) Unless you code the entire GUI in C#, which is also easy with WPF, but you should only create your GUI components in code, all GUI manipulation should still happen in your View Model. In a separate projet.
We all know reality is quite different from perception, but that is the perception even among the unwashed
So either your "representative sample" of the unwashed is not particularly representative given that for the past few weeks the Nokia WP has been one of the top selling phones with contract on Amazon and at AT&T, or you are just mouthing off as a religious moron. I would have to assume the latter since I am pretty sure your "representative sample" exists only in your mind. The "unwashed masses" have no idea about what is reliable or not, a good portion of the "unwashed" who own an Android phone are convinced they have an iPhone.
Yeah, you must be right. Nokia, who wasn't selling anything in the US before WP7 now has one of the best selling phones on Amazon (with contract).
The imminent death of Nokia (which was very real a year ago, and is still very real) was caused 100% by Nokia themselves. WP is a gamble for them. Had they gone with Android, they would have been "yet another device maker" with not much to show. WP makes them a bit different. Differentiation is important.
Wow. This was modded insightful? I thought that you had to provide some insight to be modded "Insightful". This is just religious diatribe based on nothing but the nutcase superstition of one idiot with a very telling "name".
Let's see... top seller contract phone on Amazon. Top seller phone at AT&T stores, many of them running out. AT&T says demand is significantly higher than expected. Top 5 best reviewed phones (with contract) on Amazon.
Insights indeed. In the same way that the anti-evolution Jesus freaks provide lots of "insight" into the science of biology.
evokes the "think of the children" argument, laws in the US are far stricter than anything Europe has to offer
Really? In the name of the "children" and "terrorists", EU Directive 2006/24/EF mandates that every single European citizen shall be monitored 24/7 at a minimum five minute intervals. With a minimum of cross referencing, some what is stored is: Where you were, how long you were there, who you were with, who you were talking to on the phone, for how long, who you exchanged SMSs, email or other forms of electronic communications with (but not the content of the message). It is mandated that this information be stored on every single individual in Europe for a minimum of six months.
With this directive it is now trivial for authorities in Europe to document if you are unfaithful to your spouse, if you are lying when saying your are "home sick" from work/school, if you are socializing with politically "undesirable" individuals, where you go shopping, how often, with whom etc and so forth. It is a monitoring system that collects more information about more people than STASI did in Eastern Germany during the Cold War.
The argument is that this will help the police in investigations, but that argument is BS since the police can order such data collection if there is suspicion of illicit activities. This directive is for spying on the lives of law abiding, and only law abiding citizens.
US where "ignorance of the law is not an excuse."
Ignorance of the law isn't an excuse in any European country either, but you may of course run into nice officers of the law. As an alien in the US, I have run into a few of those, and I have been "let off" with a warning each time. I don't think this is different in Europe and the US. There are more differences within Europe/US than between them. Most peace officers in, for example, Norway and Germany, would not allow "ignorance of the law" to stand with its own citizenry.
They did the only sensible thing, and ban her. She's certifiably nuts. They didn't ban her because of her stalker. The OP should have researched this a lot better.
They comprehended the situation, the dealt with it with both enthusiasm and intelligence. The woman is utterly nuts and her network connection should be permanently pulled.
Slashdot Mirror
Writing a compiler that targets .NET IL (i.e. the knock off of java bytecode) doesn't make it less C# like
This is correct.
For example, Java has Clojure, which is functional and vert different from Java. But the compiler writer had to jump through hoops to get the clojure code compiled into something Java like.
Interesting. The Java VM is essentially a stack-based execution environment, not fundamentally different from a CPU as such. I don't know why it would be significantly easier to translate Clojure to CPU instructions (which it has to end up at at the end of the day) than bytecode. I assume that it would be because Clojure typically runs on a very language-specific VM, and fitting it onto the JVM without adding the Clojure VM on top would be harder.
Again, you claim that the CIL is C# centric. I would love to see an example. What specifically about this stack-based execution environment is C# centric?
Which can be made more difficult (nothing is impossible) by: http://pacsafe.com/
http://pacsafe.com/
Sigh. I wish you would turn on your brain. Java and COBOL has very little in common language-wise, but both are legacy enterprise languages that have been passed by younger, more nimble, and evolution-ready languages like Python, Ruby, SCALA and yes, indeed, C# (no comparison with the other mentioned languages though). Sun made many mistakes with Java, the worst was the insistence on maintaining VM compatibility.
Not true. They are also enterprise programming languages with an enormous amount of legacy software written in them. They are also quite slow to evolve and have not properly incorporated any newer language constructs since their inception. They are both what you would call dinosaurs, but Java is a little less close to extinction.
Sadly there are no good signs on the horizon for Java evolution. I find it sad since I used to do a lot of work in Java. It has gone stale though. Long before Oracle bought Sun. They botched generics in a bad way, they implemented auto-boxing in an absurd way. The entire focus was on maintaining backwards (forwards in reality) compatibility in the JVM. That was, and is still, a major mistake.
I also think that both Oracle and Google might disagree with you on your statement about Android.
I'd love to see you back that one up.
Sigh. I'd like you to take a crash course in discussion too. You are the one with the statement, you're the one who would have to back something up. It is, as you should know if you had a brain, not possible to prove a negative. Now, a couple of pointers as to how and why .NET is no longer heavily tied to C#, take a look at what has been added to .NET for F# for example, and also all the work that has gone into the dynamic language aspect of .NET since last you were out of your mom's basement, I guess some times around 2002.
It should have read "thinking ahead unlike human beings".
Most of what is not on Express is C++ related. For C#, Express is mostly OK. Couple with Git and a few other things, and you have a nice environment. I could not live without remote debugging, but most developers can.
Why do you need Visual Studio Pro? For most apps, Express is plenty. And free. As in beer.
And just like iOS, it's impossible to do an Android app without using Java
Really. Seriously? You really mean that? I thought you could write native apps for Android too if you wanted.
.NET like it's inspiration, Java, is heavily tied to it's primary language.
Not really true since .NET 2.0 and basically clueless nonsense since .NET 3.5
You are almost correct. Java has been around a lot longer than C#, but it hasn't been properly maintained (maintenance through committee never works) and it is therefore lagging quite significantly behind C# today. Generics is a joke. Autoboxing is a bad idea gone wrong. The VM desperately needs an overhaul with regards to supporting modern technologies (dynamic languages and language concepts for example are significantly faster on the Microsoft VM than on Java). Java is COBOL. Sad but true. Sad because I used to love Java. I was part of a team that brought one of the earliest commercial apps to market on Java. Java's been terminally ill though, since long before Oracle got involved.
Wow. You really are quite clueless, are you not? Mono on Android, for example, beats the crap out of Java on Dalvik. On other Linux flavors, the story is much the same. .NET is mature and fast, and has great tools and library support (most of what you can find for Java is also available for .NET) and runs not quite as many places as Java, but that is mostly a concern if you are doing embedded development.
COBOL is COBOL, even if they insist on calling it "Java" these days.
Yes, and you have not been outside of your own head since 2002? C# is what Java desires to be but can't decide how to accomplish.
It's not Ruby, but it is as close as you can get among the bigger programming languages. COBOL is COBOL, even if they insist on calling it "Java" these days.
Sorry, you and the blogger you refer to are just stuck in a mid-1990s programming model, one that WPF actively discourages by being a pain in the rear to work with if you use said programming model.
WPF allows for a very clean separation of concerns, it actively encourages good design patterns such as (some would argue against) MVP, MVVM etc. Yes, there is a learning curve, but for a team developing apps that are to stay alive for years and years, WPF makes all other heavy client programming seem like it is rooted in the late crestateous. Is it perfect? No way, but it is improving, particularly now that tooling is making things easier (with the ability to debug bindings in VS2 for example.
Spend some time with Ruby, do some Rails or Sinatra stuff. Go through an entire project where you write your tests before your code, and then you will see what MS is doing with WPF.
Think about it, you can test every aspect of your GUI in code. Easily. You can click buttons, make sure the correct things show up/vanish/are enabled/disabled etc without ever showing the GUI at all.
Here is a tip, if you are writing C# code in your WPF project you are doing it wrong. If you write code-behind, you are doing it wrong. If you do any GUI related work outside of your View Model, you are probably doing it wrong (*)
*) Unless you code the entire GUI in C#, which is also easy with WPF, but you should only create your GUI components in code, all GUI manipulation should still happen in your View Model. In a separate projet.
We all know reality is quite different from perception, but that is the perception even among the unwashed
So either your "representative sample" of the unwashed is not particularly representative given that for the past few weeks the Nokia WP has been one of the top selling phones with contract on Amazon and at AT&T, or you are just mouthing off as a religious moron. I would have to assume the latter since I am pretty sure your "representative sample" exists only in your mind. The "unwashed masses" have no idea about what is reliable or not, a good portion of the "unwashed" who own an Android phone are convinced they have an iPhone.
Yeah, you must be right. Nokia, who wasn't selling anything in the US before WP7 now has one of the best selling phones on Amazon (with contract).
The imminent death of Nokia (which was very real a year ago, and is still very real) was caused 100% by Nokia themselves. WP is a gamble for them. Had they gone with Android, they would have been "yet another device maker" with not much to show. WP makes them a bit different. Differentiation is important.
Wow. This was modded insightful? I thought that you had to provide some insight to be modded "Insightful". This is just religious diatribe based on nothing but the nutcase superstition of one idiot with a very telling "name".
Let's see... top seller contract phone on Amazon. Top seller phone at AT&T stores, many of them running out. AT&T says demand is significantly higher than expected. Top 5 best reviewed phones (with contract) on Amazon.
Insights indeed. In the same way that the anti-evolution Jesus freaks provide lots of "insight" into the science of biology.
I'm assuming you are referring to EU data retention directives in 2006
I am.
(which don't actually do what you say they do).
It doesn't? Please be specific in explaining how that is so.
evokes the "think of the children" argument, laws in the US are far stricter than anything Europe has to offer
Really? In the name of the "children" and "terrorists", EU Directive 2006/24/EF mandates that every single European citizen shall be monitored 24/7 at a minimum five minute intervals. With a minimum of cross referencing, some what is stored is: Where you were, how long you were there, who you were with, who you were talking to on the phone, for how long, who you exchanged SMSs, email or other forms of electronic communications with (but not the content of the message). It is mandated that this information be stored on every single individual in Europe for a minimum of six months.
With this directive it is now trivial for authorities in Europe to document if you are unfaithful to your spouse, if you are lying when saying your are "home sick" from work/school, if you are socializing with politically "undesirable" individuals, where you go shopping, how often, with whom etc and so forth. It is a monitoring system that collects more information about more people than STASI did in Eastern Germany during the Cold War.
The argument is that this will help the police in investigations, but that argument is BS since the police can order such data collection if there is suspicion of illicit activities. This directive is for spying on the lives of law abiding, and only law abiding citizens.
US where "ignorance of the law is not an excuse."
Ignorance of the law isn't an excuse in any European country either, but you may of course run into nice officers of the law. As an alien in the US, I have run into a few of those, and I have been "let off" with a warning each time. I don't think this is different in Europe and the US. There are more differences within Europe/US than between them. Most peace officers in, for example, Norway and Germany, would not allow "ignorance of the law" to stand with its own citizenry.
They did the only sensible thing, and ban her. She's certifiably nuts. They didn't ban her because of her stalker. The OP should have researched this a lot better.
Seriously, monitoring spam, tracking abuse, and permanently banning the stalker is such a bothersome task?
Not at all for KS, and that is exactly what KS did. Rachel is a nut.
They comprehended the situation, the dealt with it with both enthusiasm and intelligence. The woman is utterly nuts and her network connection should be permanently pulled.