The Desire to learn
-
No, you're not alone. C# seems mainly pitched at the VB crowd, or people who generally find C++ 'too hard'. I'd much rather learn more about C++ than throw my time into a proprietary language ( C# OR Java ). I am amazed to look at jobnet and see people advertising for folks with experience in C# which would equate to using it since the first public beta. People are hiring coders to work on products using a beta which has substantially changed once already ? The IDE has not been released, what is WRONG with people. Writing something in the latest language will not ensure it is cool, it will ensure only that there is no depth of experience in the language, and more to the point, these are the people who will both find the bugs and deficiences in C# ( M$ have long used their users as beta testers, witness how many service releases we have for any M$ product to fix security holes, bugs, etc ), and also force their customers to install the CLR. Once the first wave goes out, the second will no longer be a problem, most people will have the CLR. I have realised I am ranting again... But I agree - why waste time on C#, when there is so much to learn in C++ ? Christian After all, there's nothing wrong with an elite as long as I'm allowed to be part of it!! - Mike Burston Oct 23, 2001
Sonork ID 100.10002:MeanManOz
I live in Bob's HungOut now
****Christian Graus wrote: C# seems mainly pitched at the VB crowd, or people who generally find C++ 'too hard'. Nope - C# is pitched at people who want to write fully managed code as quickly and painlessly as possible. ****Christian Graus wrote: The IDE has not been released, what is WRONG with people But an RC has been released and the IDE won't change from now on. ****Christian Graus wrote: Writing something in the latest language will not ensure it is cool, it will ensure only that there is no depth of experience in the language But C# is Cool. Didn't you see the DevelopMentor T-shirts?? cheers, Chris Maunder
-
****Christian Graus wrote: C# seems mainly pitched at the VB crowd, or people who generally find C++ 'too hard'. Nope - C# is pitched at people who want to write fully managed code as quickly and painlessly as possible. ****Christian Graus wrote: The IDE has not been released, what is WRONG with people But an RC has been released and the IDE won't change from now on. ****Christian Graus wrote: Writing something in the latest language will not ensure it is cool, it will ensure only that there is no depth of experience in the language But C# is Cool. Didn't you see the DevelopMentor T-shirts?? cheers, Chris Maunder
Chris Maunder wrote: Christian Graus wrote: C# seems mainly pitched at the VB crowd, or people who generally find C++ 'too hard'. Nope - C# is pitched at people who want to write fully managed code as quickly and painlessly as possible. What does 'fully managed' mean ? When I use the word 'pitched', I am referring to the nature of the hype more than anything. Chris Maunder wrote: Christian Graus wrote: The IDE has not been released, what is WRONG with people But an RC has been released and the IDE won't change from now on. It hadn't when I saw people advertising for experienced coders. Beta 2 was just out. Chris Maunder wrote: Christian Graus wrote: Writing something in the latest language will not ensure it is cool, it will ensure only that there is no depth of experience in the language But C# is Cool. Didn't you see the DevelopMentor T-shirts?? Yes, but I'd rather a Code Project T-shirt.... Christian After all, there's nothing wrong with an elite as long as I'm allowed to be part of it!! - Mike Burston Oct 23, 2001
Sonork ID 100.10002:MeanManOz
I live in Bob's HungOut now
-
Chris Maunder wrote: Christian Graus wrote: C# seems mainly pitched at the VB crowd, or people who generally find C++ 'too hard'. Nope - C# is pitched at people who want to write fully managed code as quickly and painlessly as possible. What does 'fully managed' mean ? When I use the word 'pitched', I am referring to the nature of the hype more than anything. Chris Maunder wrote: Christian Graus wrote: The IDE has not been released, what is WRONG with people But an RC has been released and the IDE won't change from now on. It hadn't when I saw people advertising for experienced coders. Beta 2 was just out. Chris Maunder wrote: Christian Graus wrote: Writing something in the latest language will not ensure it is cool, it will ensure only that there is no depth of experience in the language But C# is Cool. Didn't you see the DevelopMentor T-shirts?? Yes, but I'd rather a Code Project T-shirt.... Christian After all, there's nothing wrong with an elite as long as I'm allowed to be part of it!! - Mike Burston Oct 23, 2001
Sonork ID 100.10002:MeanManOz
I live in Bob's HungOut now
****Christian Graus wrote: What does 'fully managed' mean ? When I use the word 'pitched', I am referring to the nature of the hype more than anything. I once read that "managed" code was a pricipal of OOP, Which principal it is I'm unsure ? So, " Fully Managed " must mean you are truly using that principal. As you can guess I'm out of my depth in this, so I'm just throwing in a wild guess. Hope someone can correct me ! Because I really can not believe all these smart C Sharp converts are all using a "hype" type term without understanding it ? :-) ****Christian Graus wrote: Yes, but I'd rather a Code Project T-shirt.... Me too ! :laugh: Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
I live in Bob's HungOut now
Colin is a big fan of William Goldberg and Frank Tipler and of course Billy Connerly
-
****Christian Graus wrote: What does 'fully managed' mean ? When I use the word 'pitched', I am referring to the nature of the hype more than anything. I once read that "managed" code was a pricipal of OOP, Which principal it is I'm unsure ? So, " Fully Managed " must mean you are truly using that principal. As you can guess I'm out of my depth in this, so I'm just throwing in a wild guess. Hope someone can correct me ! Because I really can not believe all these smart C Sharp converts are all using a "hype" type term without understanding it ? :-) ****Christian Graus wrote: Yes, but I'd rather a Code Project T-shirt.... Me too ! :laugh: Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
I live in Bob's HungOut now
Colin is a big fan of William Goldberg and Frank Tipler and of course Billy Connerly
Colin Davies wrote: I once read that "managed" code was a pricipal of OOP, Which principal it is I'm unsure ? So, " Fully Managed " must mean you are truly using that principal. I thought maybe 'fully managed' means garbage collected. But that's a guess as wild as yours... Or maybe written to the CLR, but why would anyone WANT that ( i.e. even if you don't think it's a bad thing ( for some reason ), why would you think it something you'd actually seek out and desire ? ) Christian After all, there's nothing wrong with an elite as long as I'm allowed to be part of it!! - Mike Burston Oct 23, 2001
Sonork ID 100.10002:MeanManOz
I live in Bob's HungOut now
-
Colin Davies wrote: I once read that "managed" code was a pricipal of OOP, Which principal it is I'm unsure ? So, " Fully Managed " must mean you are truly using that principal. I thought maybe 'fully managed' means garbage collected. But that's a guess as wild as yours... Or maybe written to the CLR, but why would anyone WANT that ( i.e. even if you don't think it's a bad thing ( for some reason ), why would you think it something you'd actually seek out and desire ? ) Christian After all, there's nothing wrong with an elite as long as I'm allowed to be part of it!! - Mike Burston Oct 23, 2001
Sonork ID 100.10002:MeanManOz
I live in Bob's HungOut now
****Christian Graus wrote: Or maybe written to the CLR, but why would anyone WANT that ( i.e. even if you don't think it's a bad thing ( for some reason ), why would you think it something you'd actually seek out and desire ? ) This whole CLR thing almost seems like years ago when schools and others promoted interpeted languages, particulary BASIC. The worst thing that ever happened to the computer industry when somone decided to turn BASIC in to a compiled language. (my opinion) :-) BASIC was never designed to be compiled, so the compilers had to do a lot of extra work. CLR to me seems like an interpeted environment to me. I take my hat off to the MS engineers who have got it to work, however just because something works well is not a compelling reason to actually use it. ! At the end of the day, I really do not understand this Hailstorm/.NET/CLR coming revolution, with its webservices. When I read an old media article referring to "Jim Allchin" of MS, who I still believe is in charge of it all, he appeared as confused as me about "Hailstorm" and called it only a "foundation stone" of a future business model for MS. Yet I regularly see C-Sharp coders stating they understand it ! This whole thing has got me real confused to be honest Christian. :-) Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
I live in Bob's HungOut now
-
No, you're not alone. C# seems mainly pitched at the VB crowd, or people who generally find C++ 'too hard'. I'd much rather learn more about C++ than throw my time into a proprietary language ( C# OR Java ). I am amazed to look at jobnet and see people advertising for folks with experience in C# which would equate to using it since the first public beta. People are hiring coders to work on products using a beta which has substantially changed once already ? The IDE has not been released, what is WRONG with people. Writing something in the latest language will not ensure it is cool, it will ensure only that there is no depth of experience in the language, and more to the point, these are the people who will both find the bugs and deficiences in C# ( M$ have long used their users as beta testers, witness how many service releases we have for any M$ product to fix security holes, bugs, etc ), and also force their customers to install the CLR. Once the first wave goes out, the second will no longer be a problem, most people will have the CLR. I have realised I am ranting again... But I agree - why waste time on C#, when there is so much to learn in C++ ? Christian After all, there's nothing wrong with an elite as long as I'm allowed to be part of it!! - Mike Burston Oct 23, 2001
Sonork ID 100.10002:MeanManOz
I live in Bob's HungOut now
hello! >>I have realised I am ranting again... But I agree - why waste time on C#, when there is so much to learn in C++ ? << Maybe because of to be more productive while programming? It is proved that program in Java or in C# one can be 3 or 5 times more productive that while using C++. Also C# (in combination with .NET Framework) looks more modern than old environment, say C++ targeting win32 platform. It seems to me that managed environment and managed code (.NET Framework or Java) will be future of programming. btw, this questions looks to me like similar questions from past: "Why use C++ when plain C is more effective" or "Why using C when in x86 assembler we can control every processor tick and write best by hand optimized code?" SlavoF "I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand." --Confucius
-
Chris Maunder wrote: Christian Graus wrote: C# seems mainly pitched at the VB crowd, or people who generally find C++ 'too hard'. Nope - C# is pitched at people who want to write fully managed code as quickly and painlessly as possible. What does 'fully managed' mean ? When I use the word 'pitched', I am referring to the nature of the hype more than anything. Chris Maunder wrote: Christian Graus wrote: The IDE has not been released, what is WRONG with people But an RC has been released and the IDE won't change from now on. It hadn't when I saw people advertising for experienced coders. Beta 2 was just out. Chris Maunder wrote: Christian Graus wrote: Writing something in the latest language will not ensure it is cool, it will ensure only that there is no depth of experience in the language But C# is Cool. Didn't you see the DevelopMentor T-shirts?? Yes, but I'd rather a Code Project T-shirt.... Christian After all, there's nothing wrong with an elite as long as I'm allowed to be part of it!! - Mike Burston Oct 23, 2001
Sonork ID 100.10002:MeanManOz
I live in Bob's HungOut now
hello! >>What does 'fully managed' mean ?<< 'Managed code' mean code that (is written for and) running in managed environment and use (while run) services from such managed enviroments. Such managed enviromnent can be CLR while we talk about .NET Framework and about C#. CLR provide many services to running program such as memory management, thread management, code verification and code security services, compilation services (from IL to native code), garbage collection services, reflection services, ... having such set of valuable services built directly in target environment may give us some significant improvement regarding to older environment such as win32 platform. For example far more better programmer productivity, far more easiest deployment, more fine-granuled security, etc. btw, for very nice explanation if these things take a look on Episode020 of MSDN Show http://msdn.microsoft.com/theshow/Episode020/default.asp SlavoF "I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand." --Confucius
-
hello! >>I have realised I am ranting again... But I agree - why waste time on C#, when there is so much to learn in C++ ? << Maybe because of to be more productive while programming? It is proved that program in Java or in C# one can be 3 or 5 times more productive that while using C++. Also C# (in combination with .NET Framework) looks more modern than old environment, say C++ targeting win32 platform. It seems to me that managed environment and managed code (.NET Framework or Java) will be future of programming. btw, this questions looks to me like similar questions from past: "Why use C++ when plain C is more effective" or "Why using C when in x86 assembler we can control every processor tick and write best by hand optimized code?" SlavoF "I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand." --Confucius
Slavo Furman wrote: Maybe because of to be more productive while programming? It is proved that program in Java or in C# one can be 3 or 5 times more productive that while using C++. I disagree Slavo, especially for the developers who already have templates and class libabries for there industry orientated projects. Slavo Furman wrote: btw, this questions looks to me like similar questions from past: "Why use C++ when plain C is more effective" or "Why using C when in x86 assembler we can control every processor tick and write best by hand optimized code?" First your analogy is not fair the move from C to C++ was incrimental in nature, and was an enhancement also both C and C++ suport inline assembler code. So again they just enhanced assembler. Moving to C# and CLR is a total new direction in environments from the winapi. So it is not an incrimental step but a leap diagonally. I don't doubt that it will be productivr to start New Projects in C# but to move a whole project to C# is one big task. Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
I live in Bob's HungOut now
-
hello! >>I have realised I am ranting again... But I agree - why waste time on C#, when there is so much to learn in C++ ? << Maybe because of to be more productive while programming? It is proved that program in Java or in C# one can be 3 or 5 times more productive that while using C++. Also C# (in combination with .NET Framework) looks more modern than old environment, say C++ targeting win32 platform. It seems to me that managed environment and managed code (.NET Framework or Java) will be future of programming. btw, this questions looks to me like similar questions from past: "Why use C++ when plain C is more effective" or "Why using C when in x86 assembler we can control every processor tick and write best by hand optimized code?" SlavoF "I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand." --Confucius
Slavo Furman wrote: Maybe because of to be more productive while programming? It is proved that program in Java or in C# one can be 3 or 5 times more productive that while using C++. Crap, crap crap. Proven how ? Quantified how ? Studies paid for by who ? Bollocks. Slavo Furman wrote: Also C# (in combination with .NET Framework) looks more modern than old environment, say C++ targeting win32 platform. LOOKS more modern ? You mean the name, or the end result ? I'm willing to bet any amount you want to name that there is NO modern look (GUI) that can be achieved in C# and not C++. Slavo Furman wrote: It seems to me that managed environment and managed code (.NET Framework or Java) will be future of programming. Quite possibly, but only because M$ have the money and we have fast enough machines to make it so. That does not mean we should be burning our copies of Stroustrup just yet. Slavo Furman wrote: "Why use C++ when plain C is more effective" or "Why using C when in x86 assembler we can control every processor tick and write best by hand optimized code?" You know what ? I agree. If I could be as productive in C and get a speed/performance increase, I'd do it. I do it now when I choose not to use MFC if I don't need it, for example. I'm not saying C++ *forever*, I'm saying that it's stupid to abandon it *now* just because there's a trendy new language on the block. Christian After all, there's nothing wrong with an elite as long as I'm allowed to be part of it!! - Mike Burston Oct 23, 2001
Sonork ID 100.10002:MeanManOz
I live in Bob's HungOut now
-
hello! >>What does 'fully managed' mean ?<< 'Managed code' mean code that (is written for and) running in managed environment and use (while run) services from such managed enviroments. Such managed enviromnent can be CLR while we talk about .NET Framework and about C#. CLR provide many services to running program such as memory management, thread management, code verification and code security services, compilation services (from IL to native code), garbage collection services, reflection services, ... having such set of valuable services built directly in target environment may give us some significant improvement regarding to older environment such as win32 platform. For example far more better programmer productivity, far more easiest deployment, more fine-granuled security, etc. btw, for very nice explanation if these things take a look on Episode020 of MSDN Show http://msdn.microsoft.com/theshow/Episode020/default.asp SlavoF "I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand." --Confucius
Slavo Furman wrote: 'Managed code' mean code that (is written for and) running in managed environment and use (while run) services from such managed enviroments. Such managed enviromnent can be CLR while we talk about .NET Framework and about C#. You're kidding, right ? Why would anyone *want* a runtime slowing their code down ? I can see people saying for some apps it would not *matter*, but why would you *want* this, as a *feature* ???? Slavo Furman wrote: CLR provide many services to running program such as memory management, thread management, code verification and code security services, compilation services (from IL to native code), garbage collection services, reflection services, ... compilation services to get you back where you wanted to be in the first place ? memory management and garbage collection for people not smart enough to manage their own memory ? The reason C++ did not come with garbage collection as standard is that it is easily added, and it slows the language down. Slavo Furman wrote: For example far more better programmer productivity So you keep saying. I don't equate having my hand held with productivity. Christian After all, there's nothing wrong with an elite as long as I'm allowed to be part of it!! - Mike Burston Oct 23, 2001
Sonork ID 100.10002:MeanManOz
I live in Bob's HungOut now
-
Slavo Furman wrote: Maybe because of to be more productive while programming? It is proved that program in Java or in C# one can be 3 or 5 times more productive that while using C++. I disagree Slavo, especially for the developers who already have templates and class libabries for there industry orientated projects. Slavo Furman wrote: btw, this questions looks to me like similar questions from past: "Why use C++ when plain C is more effective" or "Why using C when in x86 assembler we can control every processor tick and write best by hand optimized code?" First your analogy is not fair the move from C to C++ was incrimental in nature, and was an enhancement also both C and C++ suport inline assembler code. So again they just enhanced assembler. Moving to C# and CLR is a total new direction in environments from the winapi. So it is not an incrimental step but a leap diagonally. I don't doubt that it will be productivr to start New Projects in C# but to move a whole project to C# is one big task. Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
I live in Bob's HungOut now
Colin Davies wrote: First your analogy is not fair the move from C to C++ was incrimental in nature, and was an enhancement also both C and C++ suport inline assembler code. So again they just enhanced assembler. This is only partially true. C++ bought OOP to C, and this was a huge paridgm shift for people like me who had been coding in procedural C, Assembler etc. forever. It took me quite some time to make the leap to C++ and OOP, and looking back it is something I wish I'd done a lot earlier than I did. These days I can't understand why anyone would code in C instead of C++ plus OOP, unless they have no choice. In a few years those of us that move to C# may be saying the same thing about C++. There is no doubt that we C++ folks spend a lot of time working on low level issues like memory management, pointers which somehow aren't pointing where they should be, or pointing to things which no longer exist etc.etc. Languages and frameworks which let us focus on higher level issues, and not get bogged down by the minutea, will likely play a significant role in the future of software development. Development time frames need to be reined in and costs reduced, if companies are to be competitive and stay in business. I have no idea how effective C# and .NET will be in achieving these goals, but from the comments people are making they sound persuasive. I'm pleased to say that we continue to live in interesting times.:-D Neville Franks, Author of ED for Windows. www.getsoft.com
-
Slavo Furman wrote: Maybe because of to be more productive while programming? It is proved that program in Java or in C# one can be 3 or 5 times more productive that while using C++. Crap, crap crap. Proven how ? Quantified how ? Studies paid for by who ? Bollocks. Slavo Furman wrote: Also C# (in combination with .NET Framework) looks more modern than old environment, say C++ targeting win32 platform. LOOKS more modern ? You mean the name, or the end result ? I'm willing to bet any amount you want to name that there is NO modern look (GUI) that can be achieved in C# and not C++. Slavo Furman wrote: It seems to me that managed environment and managed code (.NET Framework or Java) will be future of programming. Quite possibly, but only because M$ have the money and we have fast enough machines to make it so. That does not mean we should be burning our copies of Stroustrup just yet. Slavo Furman wrote: "Why use C++ when plain C is more effective" or "Why using C when in x86 assembler we can control every processor tick and write best by hand optimized code?" You know what ? I agree. If I could be as productive in C and get a speed/performance increase, I'd do it. I do it now when I choose not to use MFC if I don't need it, for example. I'm not saying C++ *forever*, I'm saying that it's stupid to abandon it *now* just because there's a trendy new language on the block. Christian After all, there's nothing wrong with an elite as long as I'm allowed to be part of it!! - Mike Burston Oct 23, 2001
Sonork ID 100.10002:MeanManOz
I live in Bob's HungOut now
****Christian Graus wrote: Crap, crap crap. Proven how ? Quantified how ? Studies paid for by who ? Bollocks. OK, if you must know it was me. A carton of beer and I was off spouting shit like a manager/business analyst on laxatives. ;P Us unemployed types will do anything for a carton of beer or bottle of Bundaberg Rum. :-D Michael Martin Australia mmartin@netspace.net.au "Don't belong. Never join. Think for yourself. Peace" - Victor Stone
-
Slavo Furman wrote: Maybe because of to be more productive while programming? It is proved that program in Java or in C# one can be 3 or 5 times more productive that while using C++. I disagree Slavo, especially for the developers who already have templates and class libabries for there industry orientated projects. Slavo Furman wrote: btw, this questions looks to me like similar questions from past: "Why use C++ when plain C is more effective" or "Why using C when in x86 assembler we can control every processor tick and write best by hand optimized code?" First your analogy is not fair the move from C to C++ was incrimental in nature, and was an enhancement also both C and C++ suport inline assembler code. So again they just enhanced assembler. Moving to C# and CLR is a total new direction in environments from the winapi. So it is not an incrimental step but a leap diagonally. I don't doubt that it will be productivr to start New Projects in C# but to move a whole project to C# is one big task. Regardz Colin J Davies
Sonork ID 100.9197:Colin
I live in Bob's HungOut now
well, .NET (while we talking mainly about this) is new environment, new platform, and one must learn many things to became productive and do everyday task as routine. But I still think that (at least from my experience) if you get professional C# or say Java programmer (who really know his/her stuff and already have class libs, components and prepared templates on hands, too) and C++ programmer, then - while writing normal but not trivial,for example DB oriented or web based apps, then C# or Java programmer will be really more productive than C++ programmer. >>the move from C to C++ was incrimental in nature<< maybe, maybe not. For many peoples I know tooks long time to start program using OOP principles. >>both C and C++ suport inline assembler code. So again they just enhanced assembler. << Interesting point of view. Do you really use inline assembler in your code while you program for win32 platform. I never do that, IIRC. Or you try say that writing code in assembler is so similar to coding in C++? SlavoF "I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand." --Confucius
-
Slavo Furman wrote: 'Managed code' mean code that (is written for and) running in managed environment and use (while run) services from such managed enviroments. Such managed enviromnent can be CLR while we talk about .NET Framework and about C#. You're kidding, right ? Why would anyone *want* a runtime slowing their code down ? I can see people saying for some apps it would not *matter*, but why would you *want* this, as a *feature* ???? Slavo Furman wrote: CLR provide many services to running program such as memory management, thread management, code verification and code security services, compilation services (from IL to native code), garbage collection services, reflection services, ... compilation services to get you back where you wanted to be in the first place ? memory management and garbage collection for people not smart enough to manage their own memory ? The reason C++ did not come with garbage collection as standard is that it is easily added, and it slows the language down. Slavo Furman wrote: For example far more better programmer productivity So you keep saying. I don't equate having my hand held with productivity. Christian After all, there's nothing wrong with an elite as long as I'm allowed to be part of it!! - Mike Burston Oct 23, 2001
Sonork ID 100.10002:MeanManOz
I live in Bob's HungOut now
>>You're kidding, right ?<< No. It is my year and half experience with C# and .NET. Again, it maybe do not apply for all kinds of apps. If you write some specialized apps then maybe benefits for you are not so big. But, I can say, that for general developmet in enterprise environment (partially Internet/Intranet, partially windows desktop clients, mainly business DB oriented apps, integrated with other enterprise systems) it is big leap in productivity thanks to having one unified environment, one framework of class libs with great networking features, not to saying about great deployment feature, especially no need for registering components, possibility to have various versions of one components deployed side-by-side, and possibility of running windows app from URL. I'm really not kidding. I'm not marketing gyu, I code for living. But I must say, that these are things we really use. And these things work great for us. >>Why would anyone *want* a runtime slowing their code down ?<< Because it is, in general, more easy to write managed code in C# than write unmanaged in C++. If my code is solid and performance of this code is satisfying for my customers and I can do this say in one week in C#, then why write this two weeks in C++ to have better performance. Of course, while program some apps where perfomance is crucial (graphics, scientific calculations, heavily used server controls, real-time apps, ...) then it is better to use C++ to have best performance. If best possible performance will be first criterium on all apps then all apps will be written in assembler no matter how long this takes. >>memory management and garbage collection for people not smart enough to manage their own memory ?<< If one do not use pointers in his/her code then this do not mean that one do not understand how to use it. I think when I do not need to care about releasing memory (no memory leaks, ...) then it is more easy to program, and I can be more productive. >>The reason C++ did not come with garbage collection as standard is that it is easily added, and it slows the language down.<< It is not so easy. Main problem with C++ while implementing Garbage Collection is that C++ do not have single-rooted object hierarchy. In Java or in .NET all objects are inherited from one base class, in C++ there is not such one base clas for all objects. So, Garbage Collection cannot be implemented so efficiently by this fact. SlavoF "I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand." --Confucius
-
No, you're not alone. C# seems mainly pitched at the VB crowd, or people who generally find C++ 'too hard'. I'd much rather learn more about C++ than throw my time into a proprietary language ( C# OR Java ). I am amazed to look at jobnet and see people advertising for folks with experience in C# which would equate to using it since the first public beta. People are hiring coders to work on products using a beta which has substantially changed once already ? The IDE has not been released, what is WRONG with people. Writing something in the latest language will not ensure it is cool, it will ensure only that there is no depth of experience in the language, and more to the point, these are the people who will both find the bugs and deficiences in C# ( M$ have long used their users as beta testers, witness how many service releases we have for any M$ product to fix security holes, bugs, etc ), and also force their customers to install the CLR. Once the first wave goes out, the second will no longer be a problem, most people will have the CLR. I have realised I am ranting again... But I agree - why waste time on C#, when there is so much to learn in C++ ? Christian After all, there's nothing wrong with an elite as long as I'm allowed to be part of it!! - Mike Burston Oct 23, 2001
Sonork ID 100.10002:MeanManOz
I live in Bob's HungOut now
I've been writing C++ code for almost 10 years, and while there's still something I can learn about C++, I feel C# has great potentials also for us, C++ guys. Take for example memory management. I once developed a DCOM server that was supposed to be up 24 hours a day. Most debugging time I spent on synchonisation and memory management issues. Of course, with C# I can't demand to delete the object _now_, but I'll get used to it, sure! There are many things in C++ that developer must simply learn, for example, making destructors virtual, implementing copy constructors, assignment operators etc. Whenever I declare a new class, first thing I do is to provide these functions. I stopped thinking if I really need to overload copy constructor - perhaps now I don't, but later class will be revised and lack of copy constructor will put its objects into trouble. IMO C++ requires too much of my time on watching carefully language-specific details. I'd rather use my creativity on more productive topics. One other aspect of C++ (and "C"): the code semantics can be fully controlled with macros. Take a look at ATL. Recently my new co-worker wanted to make a few changes in our old components. She had expirience with C++, and components were written in ATL. After spending two days on trying to understand how things work, she suggested that it'd be more efficient if the guy who originally wrote the components fixed it. She was right - ATL is not just C++. You can't hire a C++ guru without ATL knowledge to jump on ATL project. C# gives an impression to be more manageable in this respect. Just my 2 copecks. Vagif Abilov COM+/ATL/MFC Developer Oslo, Norway
-
Slavo Furman wrote: Maybe because of to be more productive while programming? It is proved that program in Java or in C# one can be 3 or 5 times more productive that while using C++. Crap, crap crap. Proven how ? Quantified how ? Studies paid for by who ? Bollocks. Slavo Furman wrote: Also C# (in combination with .NET Framework) looks more modern than old environment, say C++ targeting win32 platform. LOOKS more modern ? You mean the name, or the end result ? I'm willing to bet any amount you want to name that there is NO modern look (GUI) that can be achieved in C# and not C++. Slavo Furman wrote: It seems to me that managed environment and managed code (.NET Framework or Java) will be future of programming. Quite possibly, but only because M$ have the money and we have fast enough machines to make it so. That does not mean we should be burning our copies of Stroustrup just yet. Slavo Furman wrote: "Why use C++ when plain C is more effective" or "Why using C when in x86 assembler we can control every processor tick and write best by hand optimized code?" You know what ? I agree. If I could be as productive in C and get a speed/performance increase, I'd do it. I do it now when I choose not to use MFC if I don't need it, for example. I'm not saying C++ *forever*, I'm saying that it's stupid to abandon it *now* just because there's a trendy new language on the block. Christian After all, there's nothing wrong with an elite as long as I'm allowed to be part of it!! - Mike Burston Oct 23, 2001
Sonork ID 100.10002:MeanManOz
I live in Bob's HungOut now
>>Crap, crap crap. Proven how ? Quantified how ? Studies paid for by who ? Bollocks.<< See my comments above in my previous answer to you in this thread. >>LOOKS more modern ? You mean the name, or the end result ?<< I mean language features in C# and features in .NET Framework. For example Exception mechanism for error handling, code security features, support for writing components, support for multi-thread programming, all this is part of language or part of framework from beginning. I think this native support of this proved features made programming language/programming environment more modern. >>only because M$ have the money and we have fast enough machines to make it so<< If Java or .NET, or say web services application architecture, do not give us some additional value that it is not present in actually used systems, then they do not have chance on market in long term (please note, I say 'in long term'). >>You know what ? I agree. If I could be as productive in C and get a speed/performance increase, I'd do it. I do it now when I choose not to use MFC if I don't need it, for example. I'm not saying C++ *forever*, I'm saying that it's stupid to abandon it *now* just because there's a trendy new language on the block.<< 100% agree. But as I wrote in my case I get much better productivity (and speed - in my ASP web apps - too!) using C#/.NET in my projects. SlavoF "I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand." --Confucius
-
Slavo Furman wrote: 'Managed code' mean code that (is written for and) running in managed environment and use (while run) services from such managed enviroments. Such managed enviromnent can be CLR while we talk about .NET Framework and about C#. You're kidding, right ? Why would anyone *want* a runtime slowing their code down ? I can see people saying for some apps it would not *matter*, but why would you *want* this, as a *feature* ???? Slavo Furman wrote: CLR provide many services to running program such as memory management, thread management, code verification and code security services, compilation services (from IL to native code), garbage collection services, reflection services, ... compilation services to get you back where you wanted to be in the first place ? memory management and garbage collection for people not smart enough to manage their own memory ? The reason C++ did not come with garbage collection as standard is that it is easily added, and it slows the language down. Slavo Furman wrote: For example far more better programmer productivity So you keep saying. I don't equate having my hand held with productivity. Christian After all, there's nothing wrong with an elite as long as I'm allowed to be part of it!! - Mike Burston Oct 23, 2001
Sonork ID 100.10002:MeanManOz
I live in Bob's HungOut now
Wow - kind of a hot thread. I guess I feel as though I must say something. Although .NET clears away all of the cruft of the preceding decade of Windows development, which will benefit developers and users with a more robust and higher productivity experience - it isn't a matter of "want". Everyone must keep in mind that .NET IS the new Windows API. C# just happens to support it better, currently, than C++. Besides, and some have touched on this a little in this thread, the API is what takes time to learn - the language chosen is almost irrelevant. And since the entire .NET API is designed to be an orthogonal and consistent inheritance model - it will be a lot easier for people to work in than the old COM/ATL/MFC APIs which were all very different. I believe that C++ is a great language for doing meticulous work. In the future, I think MS will improve the way to develop managed C++ applications. But, right now, C# is by far the best choice for developing new Windows hosted applications. Dale Thompson
-
>>Crap, crap crap. Proven how ? Quantified how ? Studies paid for by who ? Bollocks.<< See my comments above in my previous answer to you in this thread. >>LOOKS more modern ? You mean the name, or the end result ?<< I mean language features in C# and features in .NET Framework. For example Exception mechanism for error handling, code security features, support for writing components, support for multi-thread programming, all this is part of language or part of framework from beginning. I think this native support of this proved features made programming language/programming environment more modern. >>only because M$ have the money and we have fast enough machines to make it so<< If Java or .NET, or say web services application architecture, do not give us some additional value that it is not present in actually used systems, then they do not have chance on market in long term (please note, I say 'in long term'). >>You know what ? I agree. If I could be as productive in C and get a speed/performance increase, I'd do it. I do it now when I choose not to use MFC if I don't need it, for example. I'm not saying C++ *forever*, I'm saying that it's stupid to abandon it *now* just because there's a trendy new language on the block.<< 100% agree. But as I wrote in my case I get much better productivity (and speed - in my ASP web apps - too!) using C#/.NET in my projects. SlavoF "I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand." --Confucius
Slavo Furman wrote: For example Exception mechanism for error handling This is in C++. Slavo Furman wrote: code security features This is not an issue for applications. This should be done by the operating system, not the language it was written in! I wish I had the reference to an NSA paper I read some while ago that I could share with you. Basically it argued that you cannot build a castle upon sand. The castle will fall eventually. Take away some sand, and the castle will fall. Slavo Furman wrote: support for writing components And C++ doesn't have that support? Then, how do I write Qt and COM components in C++? I must be doing something magical... Slavo Furman wrote: support for multi-thread programming There are numerous thread support libraries. Thus you have the freedom to choose. Slavo Furman wrote: all this is part of language or part of framework from beginning Undeniably this is a good thing as long as it's a part of a framework and not the language. If it's in the framework, you can always choose to choose something else. Slavo Furman wrote: I think this native support of this proved features made programming language/programming environment more modern How does it make C# more modern than C++? Yes, C# is a later invention, but can it do things that C++ can't? (Don't mention delegates, my counter argument is functors) What exactly is it that makes C# a more productive language? In COM and .NET environment, yes it has a lot to offer. But so does ATL. And if we take it a bit further, to say a UNIX environment, C# is the unproductive language. I agree with Christian, why throw out a perfectly good language out the windows (no pun intended), just because there is a new language on the block. And lets not forget porting issues.. ;)
-
hello! >>I have realised I am ranting again... But I agree - why waste time on C#, when there is so much to learn in C++ ? << Maybe because of to be more productive while programming? It is proved that program in Java or in C# one can be 3 or 5 times more productive that while using C++. Also C# (in combination with .NET Framework) looks more modern than old environment, say C++ targeting win32 platform. It seems to me that managed environment and managed code (.NET Framework or Java) will be future of programming. btw, this questions looks to me like similar questions from past: "Why use C++ when plain C is more effective" or "Why using C when in x86 assembler we can control every processor tick and write best by hand optimized code?" SlavoF "I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand." --Confucius
> It is proved that program in Java or in C# one can be 3 or > 5 times more productive that while using C++. (Some would also say that it is proven that the code can be 5 to 10 times slower than in C++... So I can trade off faster development for poorer quality applications? No, thank you!) I cannot buy the above productivity statement as 100% true, nor IMHO, should anyone else out there. There are too many conflicting reports out there. Just a quick thought: When you use an application (users are the target audience in most cases, remember), are you more likely to complain about its performance, or rave about how productive its developers were? -=- James.
-
>>Crap, crap crap. Proven how ? Quantified how ? Studies paid for by who ? Bollocks.<< See my comments above in my previous answer to you in this thread. >>LOOKS more modern ? You mean the name, or the end result ?<< I mean language features in C# and features in .NET Framework. For example Exception mechanism for error handling, code security features, support for writing components, support for multi-thread programming, all this is part of language or part of framework from beginning. I think this native support of this proved features made programming language/programming environment more modern. >>only because M$ have the money and we have fast enough machines to make it so<< If Java or .NET, or say web services application architecture, do not give us some additional value that it is not present in actually used systems, then they do not have chance on market in long term (please note, I say 'in long term'). >>You know what ? I agree. If I could be as productive in C and get a speed/performance increase, I'd do it. I do it now when I choose not to use MFC if I don't need it, for example. I'm not saying C++ *forever*, I'm saying that it's stupid to abandon it *now* just because there's a trendy new language on the block.<< 100% agree. But as I wrote in my case I get much better productivity (and speed - in my ASP web apps - too!) using C#/.NET in my projects. SlavoF "I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand." --Confucius
> But as I wrote in my case I get much better productivity > (and speed - in my ASP web apps - too!) using C#/.NET in my > projects. Interesting... I find it hard to believe that using a good quality C#-based ASP object would be faster than a good quality C++-based ASP object. But I guess that would depend greatly on the skill of the developer writing the C++-based ASP object. -=- James.