Thread: Why learn C#?

The generational garbage collecting runtime is simply better than unoptimized direct management in non-trivial cases.

What do you mean by "simply better" and "non-trivial"?

>a more objective test might be to build your software, and than see how long you can
>maintain it, and to monitor the cost depending on what you can afford
Unless you do that with both options, it's hardly a test, much less an objective one. A vastly superior stance would be to stop trying to figure out what's better and make a decision based on your needs. That's far more productive than going back and forth about unrelated language features.

Originally Posted by siavoshkc

What do you mean by "simply better" and "non-trivial"?

By "non-trivial", I mean real-world applications. By "simply better", I mean faster, more efficient.

By "non-trivial", I mean real-world applications. By "simply better", I mean faster, more efficient.

These meanings should be added to dictionaries!!!!!!!!!!!!

I don't want to proove Unmanaged code is better or C++ is better than C#. Of course C# programs are easier to write, safer, portable and eseaier to maintaine. But C++ code is faster and smaller significantly.

In my opinion, C# is not going to be better than Java because of the proprietary nature of the .NET framework (well, it's how Mircosoft is about their proprietary stuff), and the fact that Java is multi-platform.
I'd learn Java before I learned C#, BUT in Java (unfortunately) it is easy to decompile and reverse engineer any compiled .Jar file.
After learning that, I switched to C++.
Doesn't mean you can't copyright a program you make with Java, but how many closed source Java programs have you seen being sold? There are very few.
Java is used mainly in servers and business where people never really see the actual Java program, or where it is programmed for usage on large servers, so it doesn't matter. They use it because of it's immense portability between architectures AND platforms. WebCT (if you've ever taken an online class at a college) uses it for this reason.
But with C# you are limited to Microsoft (and a lot of their stuff is half-assed or worse).
There is a good garbage collector, Boehm-Demers-Weiser, for C and C++.

Oh, I forgot to mention that both Java and C# are interpreted languages, so they will always be slower overall (speaking about ideals here, if a compiled language, or even a compiler, is poorly or partially implemented (and believe you me, of both, THERE ARE
SO VERY MANY), then it would be faster to use the compiler / interpreted language (but if your job is that of a software engineer, you have to use the most efficient tools available to you)) than compiled languages.
Abstraction (metaphorically, distance from the hardware) always has a cost, but with interpreted languages, the abstraction never goes away (The Java bytecode, an intermediate format, is run within a virtual machine. This is how it's so portable).

Originally Posted by siavoshkc

But C++ code is faster and smaller significantly.

The speed difference is actually extremely small in most cases; in fact the degree of optimization done within a language affects performance far more than differences between languages.

The power of .NET is:

Code:

nmake /nodependencies

Hopefully there is also optimized native Java compiler.

This thread was resurrected only to further a language debate. I am going to contain the zombies before it is too late.

*thread closed*