Re: c# or Java???

From: MSCHAEF.COM (mschaef_at_io.com)
Date: 10/19/04 

Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 08:09:24 -0500

In article <4174738e.499950375@news.individual.net>,
Alf P. Steinbach <alfps@start.no> wrote:
  ...
>Mono can change that precisely because C# is not tied to Microsoft.

Here's hoping.

>There's
>no "version 5 just out" from MS.

There might not be "version 5... just out" of the language, but MS does
have three or four forthcoming revisons to the supporting libraries.

The scenario that concerns me is that Mono will end up with a great
language implementation (this seems certain, actually), but their
implementation of the supporting libraries will end up in the same spot
as the Wine project: eternally struggling to keep up with an
ever-changing set of libraries and API's. (This is a little unfair,
thanks to the tie in with Win32, but Windows.Forms' recent struggles with
Wine and switch away seem like an example of this.) That's going to leave
developers with the choice of a couple major .Net language/library
combinations and difficult (perhaps) portability between the two after
the fact.

Then again, if you write off "write once, run anywhere" (which you
probably should anyway) maybe this isn't so different from the
current situation with C/C++. Looking at it that way, I see your point.

>> >(2) Java is tied to Sun because it isn't an international standard, and
>>
>> What's the evidence that formal standardization means that a language
>> isn't tied to any one company?
>
>Wrong question. What's the evidence that bailing out on standardization
>(as Sun did) is necessary to retain control? Java is.

Do they control the language, or the name "Java"? I know that Sun has
strict control over the Java trademark (which I think is patently stupid,
BTW), but if I can run Java code under Kaffe (or whatever), I don't see
that as being all that different than running C# code under Mono. Of
course, this presumes the legal ability of some third party to produce
something compatible with Java, but not violate Sun's trademarks.

>But I think you're religious on this issue.

You might be suprised...

>Perhaps I should add some Microsoft bashing to avoid more of that silly
>Sun/Java promotion, but what the heck: I think Sun is just as bad...

...I agree. My basic view is that .Net is too tied to Microsoft for me to
be comfortable and Java is too tied to Sun. Both are a step above C for
general development, IMO.

-Mike 

-- 
http://www.mschaef.com

Relevant Pages

  • Re: porting from C++Builder
    ... the java was growing and, obviously, microsoft initially ... they made their own programming language, in this case, c#, ... inhouse programming for data entry forms, fat client applications, ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.vc)
  • Re: C# is a proprietary programming language ??
    ... I initially thought that C# is an ECMA standard as Microsoft submitted to them. ... It is open to everyone to create a compiler for C# or anything. ... Example, rpg language. ... > Java tried this too, ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp)
  • Re: c# embodies OSS; java CSS
    ... > language now that Linux is moving to the desktop. ... > opensource java or an alternative will be chosen that will not be to ... I agree that Mono may have a few legal issues. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.general)
  • Re: C History (was: null terminated strings)
    ... Java again, this time as a server language. ... Microsoft Transaction Server and convince everyone to pretend they ... created the design. ...
    (comp.os.vms)
  • Re: C# is a proprietary programming language ??
    ... >> Java tried this too, ... >> so when Microsoft added some extensions to the language to make it ... >> Of course, if you write code in C# on Windows, you can't run it on UNIX. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp)