I prefer C# features over java, I like java and will program in it at the drop of a hat, but prefer C# for all it offers.
I prefer C# features over java, I like java and will program in it at the drop of a hat, but prefer C# for all it offers.
<RANT>
anyone who says that C# is just a java knockoff doesn't know anything about the language. figure out who the language creator is and you'll learn where its real roots are!
</RANT>
Me? The only thing I have said favoring C# over C++ is that it is more Object Oriented, which is a good thing for an OOP language. Which also a lot disagreed.
In a way C# takes one part of C++ and does it better.
But I like more low language stuff, because I like more hardware than software, since I have studied Computer and Electrical Engineer.
The languages are too similar anyways too really favor one from another.
Yes, you. I only see C# threads from you, so I figured you have been all the rage about C# lately.
Anyway, as cpjust once said, it is one step forward, and two steps back.
From my knowledge, it lacks such things as a lot of generic programming.
It also stuffs the garbage collector down your throat.
And, of course, it's way slower than C++ code.
So there are big differences in the language, methinks, and that makes C# inferior in my eyes.
C# has generics
GC's aren't as evil as you may think.
http://www.csharphelp.com/archives2/archive297.html
http://www.nuclex.org/pages/csharp-vs-cxx-performance
In pure data crunching, sure, but for an average application the difference is neglectable. Performance is affected more by choice of algorithms and the user himself than the coirce of language, unless you're writing low level drivers or state-of-the-art games.
C# shines in RAD. I cannot imagine using C++ at work. Development time would take 10x and that would make my boss most unhappy .
MagosX.com
Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day.
Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.
Meh. I am so unaware of C#....
To me, they are. I like optional things, not things stuffed down my throat.GC's aren't as evil as you may think.
http://www.csharphelp.com/archives2/archive297.html
http://www.nuclex.org/pages/csharp-vs-cxx-performance
And they are not just "evil" performance-wise, but when you really need control of your resources. C#'s GC tends to move things around if I'm not mistaken.
Of course, of course. For PCs, the performance cost is acceptable.In pure data crunching, sure, but for an average application the difference is neglectable. Performance is affected more by choice of algorithms and the user himself than the coirce of language, unless you're writing low level drivers or state-of-the-art games.
To me, that is not. Yet, even though it is negligible, it is a difference.
What C++ lacks are libraries for stuff... otherwise it could have been as much RAD as C# & Co.C# shines in RAD. I cannot imagine using C++ at work. Development time would take 10x and that would make my boss most unhappy .
It's a shame, really, I say :/
Not to mention the coalesce operator. Plain wonderful to work with, like when writing lazy properties.
MagosX.com
Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day.
Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.
WOW, I didn't know there was that op, I could have used that at work lol.
> He said it's "not just interpreted" not "not interpreted at all"
Oops, sorry. The "correcting someone else bandwagon" is just so fun to ride though! Only when matsp isn't driving
The JIT compiles the bytecode into machine code.
That compilation is done as needed, usually at class load time (though the JIT has the option of deciding to do it based on some other metrics).
As such it's not an interpreter but a compiler, except of course that every compiler has to first interpret the code it's presented with in order to be able to compile it.
Does that make C++ an interpreted language?
No because C++ does it at compile time. There is a byte-code interpreter, thus technically it's interpreted and compiled. At least that's what they tell us in CS