,net vs pcode
-
First, let me say that I understand that Microsoft has to keep the market stirred up. It is very difficult to sell stuff into the status quo. I also understand that Microsoft needed a language it could control to base its wpf etc products on and bought into C#. That’s all well and good, but can somebody tell me why the developer community grabbed onto the .NET and its intermediate language which, to me, looks exactly the like the p-code from back in the day when Pascal was the new sexiest language. It just looks like a rehash of an old idea (albeit better executed).
It's not a new idea - though the JIT part had to wait until computers had caught up - but that doesn't mean it's a bad one. The original idea was to lose the dependency on Intel and open up a new market for MS (IIRC) but then they realised that the average punter doesn't give a stuff what computer he uses as long as Office works and he can surf for pr0n. Since this could cut into their market share, the idea of processor and OS independence was quietly forgotten... :laugh:
Ideological Purity is no substitute for being able to stick your thumb down a pipe to stop the water
-
Aren't you, like, 10 years late in asking this question ? :confused:
Watched code never compiles.
Forgive him, it looks as if he had just awakened from a long coma. ;P Cheers!
"With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine."
Ross Callon, The Twelve Networking Truths, RFC1925
-
Aren't you, like, 10 years late in asking this question ? :confused:
Watched code never compiles.
-
It's not a new idea - though the JIT part had to wait until computers had caught up - but that doesn't mean it's a bad one. The original idea was to lose the dependency on Intel and open up a new market for MS (IIRC) but then they realised that the average punter doesn't give a stuff what computer he uses as long as Office works and he can surf for pr0n. Since this could cut into their market share, the idea of processor and OS independence was quietly forgotten... :laugh:
Ideological Purity is no substitute for being able to stick your thumb down a pipe to stop the water
-
Yeah, but why did the developer community bite so hard on this? It looks like they go wherever Bill tells them to.
Probably because .NET as a framework is so, so much better than MFC. It's pretty consistent, it provides all the support structures you want, and it is easy to use. Being able to code in a variety of languages and work with them seamlessly is another plus. (Try that with MFC and see how far you get! :laugh:)
Ideological Purity is no substitute for being able to stick your thumb down a pipe to stop the water
-
Yeah, but why did the developer community bite so hard on this? It looks like they go wherever Bill tells them to.
stevev6 wrote:
why did the developer community bite so hard on this?
Because .NET is about so much more than JIT and IL. Really, most devs don't care about this - although the language neutrality of .NET is nice - it allowed VB programmers to be first class citizens with C# devs, knowing that their code was producing largely the same underlying exe. The big thing was the .NET framework itself - a platform that provides far more than Pascal and PCode ever did (and I spent a fair bit of time using Pascal with PCode back at Uni). Sure, if you took the framework away, the two would be broadly the same. Frankly, this looks like another attempt at MS bashing. Honestly, I thought we'd have got past this by now. If .NET doesn't suit you - don't use it. Don't waste time bitching about it. I don't use Objective-C, but that doesn't mean that I don't see that it has a place.
*pre-emptive celebratory nipple tassle jiggle* - Sean Ewington
"Mind bleach! Send me mind bleach!" - Nagy Vilmos
CodeStash - Online Snippet Management | My blog | MoXAML PowerToys | Mole 2010 - debugging made easier
-
stevev6 wrote:
why did the developer community bite so hard on this?
Because .NET is about so much more than JIT and IL. Really, most devs don't care about this - although the language neutrality of .NET is nice - it allowed VB programmers to be first class citizens with C# devs, knowing that their code was producing largely the same underlying exe. The big thing was the .NET framework itself - a platform that provides far more than Pascal and PCode ever did (and I spent a fair bit of time using Pascal with PCode back at Uni). Sure, if you took the framework away, the two would be broadly the same. Frankly, this looks like another attempt at MS bashing. Honestly, I thought we'd have got past this by now. If .NET doesn't suit you - don't use it. Don't waste time bitching about it. I don't use Objective-C, but that doesn't mean that I don't see that it has a place.
*pre-emptive celebratory nipple tassle jiggle* - Sean Ewington
"Mind bleach! Send me mind bleach!" - Nagy Vilmos
CodeStash - Online Snippet Management | My blog | MoXAML PowerToys | Mole 2010 - debugging made easier
-
Well, I'm no MS fanboy but this isn't bashing.(I gave that job to Apple) So, what you are saying is that the developers bit on the tools and overlooked the infrastructure. That, at least, makes some sense. Thanks. stevev
stevev6 wrote:
what you are saying is that the developers bit on the tools
Yup.
*pre-emptive celebratory nipple tassle jiggle* - Sean Ewington
"Mind bleach! Send me mind bleach!" - Nagy Vilmos
CodeStash - Online Snippet Management | My blog | MoXAML PowerToys | Mole 2010 - debugging made easier
-
Yeah, but why did the developer community bite so hard on this? It looks like they go wherever Bill tells them to.
stevev6 wrote:
It looks like they go wherever Bill tells them to.
100% true. a lot of people seem very eager to jump on every new toolkit MS releases.
-
Well, I'm no MS fanboy but this isn't bashing.(I gave that job to Apple) So, what you are saying is that the developers bit on the tools and overlooked the infrastructure. That, at least, makes some sense. Thanks. stevev
stevev6 wrote:
So, what you are saying is that the developers bit on the tools and overlooked the infrastructure. That, at least, makes some sense. Thanks.
Well, Pete just replied "yup," to this, and I would not like to meta-comment on Pete's remark, but I find your interpretation of his remarks bizarre. The "whole package," imho, was adapted rapidly because of the integration of infrastructure, the great developer IDE (Visual Studio), the beauty of the C# language, the "language agnostic" FrameWork that let former VB programmers, and other language creators, enter an "equal" playing field: the whole was much greater, in this case, than the sum of its parts: and very few programmers ever work directly with the intermediate-code produced which is JIT'd. I find the idea that developers "overlooked the infrastructure" absurd, and, historically, inaccurate. best, Bill
It keeps me humble to think there's more bacteria in my gut than neurons in my brain, and that twenty trillion neutrinos pass through one hand a second, and that the average mattress contains 20 million bedbugs each of whom shits once per hour.
-
stevev6 wrote:
So, what you are saying is that the developers bit on the tools and overlooked the infrastructure. That, at least, makes some sense. Thanks.
Well, Pete just replied "yup," to this, and I would not like to meta-comment on Pete's remark, but I find your interpretation of his remarks bizarre. The "whole package," imho, was adapted rapidly because of the integration of infrastructure, the great developer IDE (Visual Studio), the beauty of the C# language, the "language agnostic" FrameWork that let former VB programmers, and other language creators, enter an "equal" playing field: the whole was much greater, in this case, than the sum of its parts: and very few programmers ever work directly with the intermediate-code produced which is JIT'd. I find the idea that developers "overlooked the infrastructure" absurd, and, historically, inaccurate. best, Bill
It keeps me humble to think there's more bacteria in my gut than neurons in my brain, and that twenty trillion neutrinos pass through one hand a second, and that the average mattress contains 20 million bedbugs each of whom shits once per hour.
I hung my yup, very narrowly, on the part that said that devs bit on the tools. If we treat it kindly, the tools could be extended to be Win Forms and the whole ASP.NET infrastructure. These represented a huge step forward from what had been there before.
*pre-emptive celebratory nipple tassle jiggle* - Sean Ewington
"Mind bleach! Send me mind bleach!" - Nagy Vilmos
CodeStash - Online Snippet Management | My blog | MoXAML PowerToys | Mole 2010 - debugging made easier
-
stevev6 wrote:
It looks like they go wherever Bill tells them to.
100% true. a lot of people seem very eager to jump on every new toolkit MS releases.
-
I hung my yup, very narrowly, on the part that said that devs bit on the tools. If we treat it kindly, the tools could be extended to be Win Forms and the whole ASP.NET infrastructure. These represented a huge step forward from what had been there before.
*pre-emptive celebratory nipple tassle jiggle* - Sean Ewington
"Mind bleach! Send me mind bleach!" - Nagy Vilmos
CodeStash - Online Snippet Management | My blog | MoXAML PowerToys | Mole 2010 - debugging made easier
Pete O'Hanlon wrote:
I hung my yup, very narrowly
Hi Pete, Would that I had the intelligence, and intuition, to understand the nuances of how you hang your yup :) best, Bill
It keeps me humble to think there's more bacteria in my gut than neurons in my brain, and that twenty trillion neutrinos pass through one hand a second, and that the average mattress contains 20 million bedbugs each of whom shits once per hour.
