Thread: Is C++.NET worthwhile?

  1. #16
    Geek. Cobras2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    near Westlock, and hour north of Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    Quote Originally Posted by dxfoo
    I kinda to get into graphics, but the code looks mighty long and obscure w/ C++, but that's for another discussion.
    You might wanna look into SDL ( )

    Quote Originally Posted by dxfoo
    Either you're serious, or I took this the wrong way. Either way, I felt like sharing this thought. Side wars keep coming up when someone mentions .NET in a Java forum, etc. This is getting rediculous.
    It's true that any programmer prefers a certain language for their personal projects, but it doesn't work like that in the real world, sorry. I enjoy programming, not C++, not .NET., not Java. Just programming.
    This is true to a certain extent. However, there are sometimes concerns that go beyond the current usability of a language - and whether or not usability of .NET or Java or w/e is currently in good shape or not I will not even adress - to future usability. If everyone learns .NET and all the companies use .NET then everyone owes M$. If everyone learns Java and all the companies use Java then everyone owes Sun. Is that a bad thing? not necessarily - but there's nothing to say it won't become a bad thing.

    The difference (in political sense, not in pure programming sense) between Java/.NET and C++ is that Java/.NET are owned by Sun and Micro$oft. C++ is, I believe, public domain, although the ISO does hold a copyright on the standard (copyright does not mean they own the ideas contained in the standard - it means they own the particular arrangement of letters and words which comprises the document they wrote to explain the standard). Therefore anyone who wants to can use C++. With .NET or Java, however, only people who Sun or M$ says can use it, can use it.

    Basically it's the whole idea of control; would you want to be under communist rule, if the communist leaders were nice to everyone? No. Why not? because, who knows when new leaders will take over and won't be so nice.. and the system is all set up for them to be mean however they want to be?

    Quote Originally Posted by dxfoo
    If you take sides, you're a fool.
    Isn't being insultingly non-sided just as bad as being insultingly sided? That's like being an atheist and saying "anyone who believes in a god is a fool" instead of being either a multi-theist (believes in many gods) or a pantheist (believes everything is god, and god is everything) and calling each other names for what you do believe in.

    Quote Originally Posted by dxfoo
    Programming is not politics.
    Programming is so politics - the idea is that Micro$oft (for example) is trying to get programmers to spend time learning their languages, which translates into more companies using their stuff (not just generic stuff programmed to work just like their stuff by using an open standard) because it's easy to find programmers who know it. They are playing at politics, so if you don't play at politics, then all you're doing is letting them play their game.

    If you don't mind their politics then go with it.. but don't say it isn't politics, that just demonstrates a lack of understanding IMHO.
    James G. Flewelling
    Rgistered Linux User #327359
    Athabasca University Student (BSc. CIS)
    ---GEEK CODE---
    Version: 3.12
    GCS/IT/M d- s+:++ a-->->>+>++>+++>? C++++>$ UL++>++++$ P++>++++ L++>++++$
    E W++ N o? K? w++(--)>--- O? M? V? PS--(---) PE Y+ PGP? t 5? !X R(*)>++
    tv-->! b++(+++)>++++ DI? D+++(---)>++++$ G e*>++$ h++>*$ r!>+++ y?
    ----/GEEK CODE----
    upd: 2005-02-11

  2. #17
    Cat without Hat CornedBee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    The Java language specification is public, too, and anyone is free to implement it free of charge. In fact, GNU is already doing so (see GCJ and GNU Classlib). Then there's the Kaffee JVM, another completely independent implementation.
    However, I believe the Java standard is, in theory, subject to change at Sun's sole discretion. I'm not entirely sure about that.

    C# is an ISO standard that is therefore not subject to change. (Of course, MS can freely extend the language and is doing so.) Thus, the Mono project's C# implementation is pretty secure. On the other hand, only very few libraries in .Net follow any standard, unlike Java, where pretty much everything is covered by some standard. Thus, the Mono .Net framework is far harder to keep up to date.
    All the buzzt!

    "There is not now, nor has there ever been, nor will there ever be, any programming language in which it is the least bit difficult to write bad code."
    - Flon's Law

Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. migrate from .Net 2.0 to .Net 3.0
    By George2 in forum C# Programming
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-25-2007, 04:07 AM
  2. Some .NET Distribution Stats
    By nickname_changed in forum C# Programming
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-14-2005, 03:41 AM
  3. IE 6 status bar
    By DavidP in forum Tech Board
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 10-23-2002, 05:31 PM
  4. .net
    By ygfperson in forum A Brief History of
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 02-15-2002, 01:15 AM
  5. Visual J#
    By mfc2themax in forum A Brief History of
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-08-2001, 02:41 PM