Quake II and Managed C++ in .Net
by Jarrod Roberson · in Technical Issues · 07/17/2003 (10:13 am) · 22 replies
About the author
#2
Like it or not, Microshaft makes a pretty decent compiler, and since most games are made for the Windows platform, it just makes sense to use it.
The article is an interesting one on upgrading an awesome (for its time anyway) C program to C++, and I'm sure you could use the knowledge for any compiler.
08/05/2003 (5:32 pm)
I for one am using MS VS.net because it's pretty much the "standard" C++ compiler.Like it or not, Microshaft makes a pretty decent compiler, and since most games are made for the Windows platform, it just makes sense to use it.
The article is an interesting one on upgrading an awesome (for its time anyway) C program to C++, and I'm sure you could use the knowledge for any compiler.
#3
GCC is the "standard" C++ compiler.
I could get into a long, drawn out sermon that wouldn't be taken seriously by the pro-microsoft crowd anyways, but I really just don't feel like it tonight.
I will say this, when Linux/BSD starts gaining enough ground on the desktop for people to notice, may whatever god you believe in help you to adjust to real "standards".
08/05/2003 (6:47 pm)
I gotta agree with Luke on this one. There's nothing "standard" about microsoft. The only reason it seems standard is because they control the marketshare for desktops. GCC is the "standard" C++ compiler.
I could get into a long, drawn out sermon that wouldn't be taken seriously by the pro-microsoft crowd anyways, but I really just don't feel like it tonight.
I will say this, when Linux/BSD starts gaining enough ground on the desktop for people to notice, may whatever god you believe in help you to adjust to real "standards".
#4
Visual Studio .Net does NOT mean you have to use the .Net framework.
The fact is after some checking the C++ compiler behind Visual Studio .Net 2003 is one of the most "compliant" on the market, including all the "free" compilers which are still behind in some of the more advanced/esoteric C++ standards.
And this is not even taking into account performance optomizations which seems Redmond has stepped up to the plate on that finally also.
So before you can agree with Luke you have to understand what he and the above article are refering to, which is the .Net framework NOT the IDE.
Until someone does what Apple did ( which is a day late and a dollar short it seems ), no *nix is not going to make any inroads to desktops in your lifetime.
08/05/2003 (7:59 pm)
All of you are confused.Visual Studio .Net does NOT mean you have to use the .Net framework.
The fact is after some checking the C++ compiler behind Visual Studio .Net 2003 is one of the most "compliant" on the market, including all the "free" compilers which are still behind in some of the more advanced/esoteric C++ standards.
And this is not even taking into account performance optomizations which seems Redmond has stepped up to the plate on that finally also.
So before you can agree with Luke you have to understand what he and the above article are refering to, which is the .Net framework NOT the IDE.
Until someone does what Apple did ( which is a day late and a dollar short it seems ), no *nix is not going to make any inroads to desktops in your lifetime.
#5
08/05/2003 (8:56 pm)
I say you are all nutz for using any OS but DOS 6.22
#6
As a lifelong windows user, never having lived more than ten miles from the microsoft campus, and just having converted two of my three computers to linux (third as soon as I get a non-propriatary modem), your assumption is asinine.
Someone might give two sh*ts what you think the future of the desktop market holds, but I'm confident nobody needs to be told what it holds. You speak as though you know the ultimate truth, not as though your stating an opinion, and thats an ignorant thing to do. And it is an opinion, that I can say with absolute truth.
Is this just another OS flame war or does someone besides Jarrod care quakeII compiles in .net? Really, as a non-programmer I have no idea if this is interesting or not.
08/05/2003 (9:11 pm)
Quote:Until someone does what Apple did ( which is a day late and a dollar short it seems ), no *nix is not going to make any inroads to desktops in your lifetime.
As a lifelong windows user, never having lived more than ten miles from the microsoft campus, and just having converted two of my three computers to linux (third as soon as I get a non-propriatary modem), your assumption is asinine.
Someone might give two sh*ts what you think the future of the desktop market holds, but I'm confident nobody needs to be told what it holds. You speak as though you know the ultimate truth, not as though your stating an opinion, and thats an ignorant thing to do. And it is an opinion, that I can say with absolute truth.
Is this just another OS flame war or does someone besides Jarrod care quakeII compiles in .net? Really, as a non-programmer I have no idea if this is interesting or not.
#7
Not particularly interesting in most regards, but it underscores what a great job Microsoft has done allowing for a mix of native code, managed C++ code, and other .NET/CLR language code. .NET is a great platform for writing applications in and the fact that it integrates very easily with native code (unlike Java, which can integrate with native code but requires lots of JNI work every time) is really nice for when you need to drop to native for a speed boost.
And .net doesn't totally tie you to Microsoft's platform -- check out Mono, Portable.NET, etc.
08/05/2003 (9:50 pm)
Quote:
Is this just another OS flame war or does someone besides Jarrod care quakeII compiles in .net? Really, as a non-programmer I have no idea if this is interesting or not.
Not particularly interesting in most regards, but it underscores what a great job Microsoft has done allowing for a mix of native code, managed C++ code, and other .NET/CLR language code. .NET is a great platform for writing applications in and the fact that it integrates very easily with native code (unlike Java, which can integrate with native code but requires lots of JNI work every time) is really nice for when you need to drop to native for a speed boost.
And .net doesn't totally tie you to Microsoft's platform -- check out Mono, Portable.NET, etc.
#8
.net is their answer to sun's java. That's why they stopped including java and started pushing .net hard.
Saying mono, portable.net, etc will actually work with microsoft's version is a lot like saying microsoft's XML implementation in office is really XML.
What they do, and have always done is take really good open ideas/standards and close them off and bastardize it. Usually, just enough to where it will not work with non-microsoft solutions. Then they do the massive advertising run that leads you to believe this is some sort of new standard and everyone must convert and/or learn it to keep current.
When you look at the company itself, theses are the same guys that are sending people to jail with real bad guys for making mod chips for xbox. Even if you're so hard core microsoft that you bust a nut everytime you load up the new beta version of windows when it gets leaked on the net, how can you get behind a company that doesn't allow you real ownership of anything. Including that nice new xbox sitting in your entertainment center.
Bringing OS back in to the mix, when someone says *nix desktops will never happen, I say - microsoft is on top, the only place it can go is down from here. You also gotta remember that places like Redhat are gunning for the server market first, corporate desktop second, then the end user desktop.
So that tells me (when making games is concerned), instead of trying to compete with million of other microsoft platform game makers aspiring to have that xbox title, I'm going to form my foothold making Linux games. When it finally starts trickling down to the end user desktops, I'll be right there with a new game to play on your pretty new machine.
08/05/2003 (11:06 pm)
Ok, lets take the OS part out of it for a minute and look at microsoft's products. .net is their answer to sun's java. That's why they stopped including java and started pushing .net hard.
Saying mono, portable.net, etc will actually work with microsoft's version is a lot like saying microsoft's XML implementation in office is really XML.
What they do, and have always done is take really good open ideas/standards and close them off and bastardize it. Usually, just enough to where it will not work with non-microsoft solutions. Then they do the massive advertising run that leads you to believe this is some sort of new standard and everyone must convert and/or learn it to keep current.
When you look at the company itself, theses are the same guys that are sending people to jail with real bad guys for making mod chips for xbox. Even if you're so hard core microsoft that you bust a nut everytime you load up the new beta version of windows when it gets leaked on the net, how can you get behind a company that doesn't allow you real ownership of anything. Including that nice new xbox sitting in your entertainment center.
Bringing OS back in to the mix, when someone says *nix desktops will never happen, I say - microsoft is on top, the only place it can go is down from here. You also gotta remember that places like Redhat are gunning for the server market first, corporate desktop second, then the end user desktop.
So that tells me (when making games is concerned), instead of trying to compete with million of other microsoft platform game makers aspiring to have that xbox title, I'm going to form my foothold making Linux games. When it finally starts trickling down to the end user desktops, I'll be right there with a new game to play on your pretty new machine.
#9
Your tinfoil hat is on pretty tight.
Even the most ardent open source zealots I know, assuming they appreciate good technology, think .NET is amazing and much more than just their "answer to Java", though that certainly played a part in its development. Why do you think the Ximian folk are even working on Mono? The people at Ximian are about as hardcore "Free (as in Speech) Software" as you can get...they certainly aren't tools of Microsoft. If you took your anti-Microsoft glasses off for a minute you might see why .NET is important. Maybe not today... but over the coming years.
Also, Mono is extremely compatible with Microsoft's .NET. The only places it isn't are where they are still implementing class libraries (the .NET class library is large, this will take a while).
.NET is much more open than Java in terms of standards. The CLR and C# are both ECMA standards. Java isn't standardized by any recognized body.
If you think I'm going to shed a tear for people who get busted for selling xbox mod chips, think again. You can talk all you want about how these can be used to run Linux on the xbox and do homebrew development and whatever else, but at the end of the day you and I both know that 99% of the mod chips sold are going to be used to pirate games, an activity which I don't support for what should be obvious reasons.
I respect your idealism to a degree but most of us live in the real world, the one where there is not enough money to be made on a Linux port of a game to be worth the effort. Loki's gone and forgotten, id has said publically various times that the Linux port of Quake3 did even worse than their original low expectations, etc. If you want to make Linux games because you think it is the right thing to do, more power to you. If you really think it will be a profitable venture for the next 5-8 years, I disagree.
08/06/2003 (12:31 am)
Quote:
Saying mono, portable.net, etc will actually work with microsoft's version is a lot like saying microsoft's XML implementation in office is really XML.
Your tinfoil hat is on pretty tight.
Even the most ardent open source zealots I know, assuming they appreciate good technology, think .NET is amazing and much more than just their "answer to Java", though that certainly played a part in its development. Why do you think the Ximian folk are even working on Mono? The people at Ximian are about as hardcore "Free (as in Speech) Software" as you can get...they certainly aren't tools of Microsoft. If you took your anti-Microsoft glasses off for a minute you might see why .NET is important. Maybe not today... but over the coming years.
Also, Mono is extremely compatible with Microsoft's .NET. The only places it isn't are where they are still implementing class libraries (the .NET class library is large, this will take a while).
.NET is much more open than Java in terms of standards. The CLR and C# are both ECMA standards. Java isn't standardized by any recognized body.
If you think I'm going to shed a tear for people who get busted for selling xbox mod chips, think again. You can talk all you want about how these can be used to run Linux on the xbox and do homebrew development and whatever else, but at the end of the day you and I both know that 99% of the mod chips sold are going to be used to pirate games, an activity which I don't support for what should be obvious reasons.
I respect your idealism to a degree but most of us live in the real world, the one where there is not enough money to be made on a Linux port of a game to be worth the effort. Loki's gone and forgotten, id has said publically various times that the Linux port of Quake3 did even worse than their original low expectations, etc. If you want to make Linux games because you think it is the right thing to do, more power to you. If you really think it will be a profitable venture for the next 5-8 years, I disagree.
#10
Here's my position on the xbox mods. I don't care what you do with the box. It's your box. However, thats not microsoft's position. You're renting the box, you don't own the box, we control what you do with the box. They're changing the rules of retail, when I go to the store and buy something, its mine. I can do whatever I want with it. Stick a eula on it and all the sudden I don't really own anything anymore.
Like I said, I don't feel like preaching or starting a OS flame war. It's a never ending discussion that just eats time and pisses people off. I'll continue to use and develop in Linux and you keep going with your setup.
As for what you think about what ventures will be profitable or not, I really don't give a rat's ass. It's a opinion at best, and opinions are like assholes, everybody has one.
08/06/2003 (1:16 am)
Tinfoil hat.. you think that one up all by yourself?Here's my position on the xbox mods. I don't care what you do with the box. It's your box. However, thats not microsoft's position. You're renting the box, you don't own the box, we control what you do with the box. They're changing the rules of retail, when I go to the store and buy something, its mine. I can do whatever I want with it. Stick a eula on it and all the sudden I don't really own anything anymore.
Like I said, I don't feel like preaching or starting a OS flame war. It's a never ending discussion that just eats time and pisses people off. I'll continue to use and develop in Linux and you keep going with your setup.
As for what you think about what ventures will be profitable or not, I really don't give a rat's ass. It's a opinion at best, and opinions are like assholes, everybody has one.
#11
When you buy an XBox you can do whatever you want with it you simply void the waranty if you open it up. Microsoft went after the mod chips because on the grounds that they encourage and support piracy, which is true.
You are perfectly entitled to get a mod chip and stick it in your xbox but, then microsoft will not suport that machine if it goes wrong even if it was less than a year old.
I like mod chips but usually wait a year before modding my machine as it's then out of warranty anyways so if it breaks it breaks.
I should also have added that any EULA that comes with the xbox is legally invalid due to the fact that you would need to agree to it BEFORE purchasing the xbox otherwise once you get it home and plug it in for the first time you would need to be presented with a EULA, which if you didn't agree to it, would entitle you to bring the machine back to the shop for a full refund. I have a sucessful lawyer in the family and this is a fact of law a EULA must be read and understood to be enforcable. You must have agreed to it after fully understanding what you have agreed to in other words
08/06/2003 (4:21 am)
NfoCipher what are you on about?!?When you buy an XBox you can do whatever you want with it you simply void the waranty if you open it up. Microsoft went after the mod chips because on the grounds that they encourage and support piracy, which is true.
You are perfectly entitled to get a mod chip and stick it in your xbox but, then microsoft will not suport that machine if it goes wrong even if it was less than a year old.
I like mod chips but usually wait a year before modding my machine as it's then out of warranty anyways so if it breaks it breaks.
I should also have added that any EULA that comes with the xbox is legally invalid due to the fact that you would need to agree to it BEFORE purchasing the xbox otherwise once you get it home and plug it in for the first time you would need to be presented with a EULA, which if you didn't agree to it, would entitle you to bring the machine back to the shop for a full refund. I have a sucessful lawyer in the family and this is a fact of law a EULA must be read and understood to be enforcable. You must have agreed to it after fully understanding what you have agreed to in other words
#12
By buying that XBox, you are ageeing to the fucking EULA and M$ will own you.
And who the hell reads them anyway?
They can sell the XBox with whatever the hell they want in the EULA and feel safe that next to no-one will read the bloody thing....
Im staying with linux, anything i need to run in windows gets run in WineX.
I really did not intend to start a flame war on this bloody OS debate, nada...
Hell stuffit, OS-X is better than windows....
If only apple would port their Aqua wm to Linux then we would have a seriously good alternative to windows and alot more ppl would probably run linux (aqua is the only appla owned part of os-x, its built on the free-bsd kernel and includes most GNU tools)
Im not saying the other windowmanagers out there arnt good, but we need some proper force behind linux, and apple is one of the names that would help.
(Torque runs and looks better on linux)
08/06/2003 (5:22 am)
M$ way of going about the EULA is when you buy the XBox, it means you ARE agreeing to it. Theres no way at all to buy one without agreeing to it, not possible, if you didnt agree to it, it would be illegal for you to own it.By buying that XBox, you are ageeing to the fucking EULA and M$ will own you.
And who the hell reads them anyway?
They can sell the XBox with whatever the hell they want in the EULA and feel safe that next to no-one will read the bloody thing....
Im staying with linux, anything i need to run in windows gets run in WineX.
I really did not intend to start a flame war on this bloody OS debate, nada...
Hell stuffit, OS-X is better than windows....
If only apple would port their Aqua wm to Linux then we would have a seriously good alternative to windows and alot more ppl would probably run linux (aqua is the only appla owned part of os-x, its built on the free-bsd kernel and includes most GNU tools)
Im not saying the other windowmanagers out there arnt good, but we need some proper force behind linux, and apple is one of the names that would help.
(Torque runs and looks better on linux)
#13
John you are the one flaming someone and not even understanding the thread, the point of that article is NOT that it compiles under .Net is that they are using the .Net framework and the managed C++ code to enhance and extend it.
Seems even the microsoft-nistas such as yourself have been completely confused by the microsoft FUD machine and the entire "new coke" marketing scheme of just renaming everything .Net and confusing everyone about what .Net really means, which by the way is not much right now.
And yes, *nix is not going to be a viable desktop replacement for Windows to the average PC owner/gamer until it has a Window system as advanced and seemless as OSX or better. That is a fact, no opinion there.
Seems George is the only one that understands the significance of this article. Memory managed C++ code being integrated with legacy C code with very little effort and that can be "modded" extended with non-C/C++ easily.
Did you people even read the article I posted the link to or just decided to whip out the flame throwers when you saw .Net?
08/06/2003 (6:45 am)
Quote:
Is this just another OS flame war or does someone besides Jarrod care quakeII compiles in .net? Really, as a non-programmer I have no idea if this is interesting or not.
John you are the one flaming someone and not even understanding the thread, the point of that article is NOT that it compiles under .Net is that they are using the .Net framework and the managed C++ code to enhance and extend it.
Seems even the microsoft-nistas such as yourself have been completely confused by the microsoft FUD machine and the entire "new coke" marketing scheme of just renaming everything .Net and confusing everyone about what .Net really means, which by the way is not much right now.
And yes, *nix is not going to be a viable desktop replacement for Windows to the average PC owner/gamer until it has a Window system as advanced and seemless as OSX or better. That is a fact, no opinion there.
Seems George is the only one that understands the significance of this article. Memory managed C++ code being integrated with legacy C code with very little effort and that can be "modded" extended with non-C/C++ easily.
Did you people even read the article I posted the link to or just decided to whip out the flame throwers when you saw .Net?
#14
08/06/2003 (7:24 am)
Quote:And yes, *nix is not going to be a viable desktop replacement for Windows to the average PC owner/gamer until it has a Window system as advanced and seemless as OSX or better. That is a fact, no opinion there.That is an opinion.
#15
Ernest: don't busrt his bubble
08/06/2003 (12:03 pm)
Jarrod, I was responding to your statement (hence the quote) not the topic, I made that painfully obvious.Ernest: don't busrt his bubble
#16
Im sure thats a fact, because most people who 'just want to use the thing' have no bloody idea what their doing, sometimes even in windows.
Hands up who wants a scheme that forces people to take a small computer use course and aquire a liscence that says they know what they are doing before they can buy a computer.
(problem is it will frustrate ppl who dont need it)
Im speaking from a linux advocate standpoint.
There are alot of distro's stepping up to the plate on that issue, and some good windowmanagers trying to help out. (kde, gnome, even tho gnome is bloat these days with kde not far off).
The reason why we need a big name behind a window manager is it would beable to create some sort of standard, which would be good for newbies and others alike. People who know what they are doing wont have a problem with that, they will know what they want and knwo how to set it up.
As for .net... well. nearly every program ive tried that was built on it required the .net runtimes and libs. Thats not cross platform.
And we're lucky some smarties have managed to make linux versions of those libs and runtimes, otherwise how the hell would you port the fucker?
M$ has a good tactic, make it damned easy to write progs for their os, using modified language to luck it in, slowly change the standard and soon these idiots wont know how to port the shit to a differant os because they used a language twisted and corupted by M$.
C#, what the hell do you call that? A basterdised version of C++, and watch out, C# wont bear any resemblance to C++ soon, except structure maybe.
Might take awhile, 2-5 years but it happens.
gah!
Frickin hate it, they make it bloody easy for a person to develop for them and lock the unfortunate buggers to Bills arse.
08/06/2003 (5:36 pm)
*nix really does need a fair bit of work done to make it a viable option for people breast fed by windows.Im sure thats a fact, because most people who 'just want to use the thing' have no bloody idea what their doing, sometimes even in windows.
Hands up who wants a scheme that forces people to take a small computer use course and aquire a liscence that says they know what they are doing before they can buy a computer.
(problem is it will frustrate ppl who dont need it)
Im speaking from a linux advocate standpoint.
There are alot of distro's stepping up to the plate on that issue, and some good windowmanagers trying to help out. (kde, gnome, even tho gnome is bloat these days with kde not far off).
The reason why we need a big name behind a window manager is it would beable to create some sort of standard, which would be good for newbies and others alike. People who know what they are doing wont have a problem with that, they will know what they want and knwo how to set it up.
As for .net... well. nearly every program ive tried that was built on it required the .net runtimes and libs. Thats not cross platform.
And we're lucky some smarties have managed to make linux versions of those libs and runtimes, otherwise how the hell would you port the fucker?
M$ has a good tactic, make it damned easy to write progs for their os, using modified language to luck it in, slowly change the standard and soon these idiots wont know how to port the shit to a differant os because they used a language twisted and corupted by M$.
C#, what the hell do you call that? A basterdised version of C++, and watch out, C# wont bear any resemblance to C++ soon, except structure maybe.
Might take awhile, 2-5 years but it happens.
gah!
Frickin hate it, they make it bloody easy for a person to develop for them and lock the unfortunate buggers to Bills arse.
#17
They shouldn't have to know what they are doing beyond learning a VERY SIMPLE interface, just like you shouldn't have to learn the inner workings of a car beyond knowing how to work the pedals and learning shifting/steering. Not everyone is interested in computers for their own sake, some people (including some that are geniuses in other fields) just want their computers to be simple tools that help out with their non-computercentric work and do simple things like web browsing, email, etc.
And the programs you build under Linux need the glibc runtime and associated libs. The programs you build under Java need the Java runtime and libs. What is your point?
Why would they go and make drastic incompatible changes to the language while they are trying to build up a developer base? If anything C# is becoming MORE C++ like with the addition of generics (ala C++ templates), etc. And is moving away from C++ such a bad idea?
I use C++ both professionally and personally because practically speaking it is the best choice for high performance code, but the language really sucks in a multitude of ways. The fact that the language specification is like 1000 pages is ridiculous. The fact that there is no compiler on the market that is 100% C++ standard compliant should tell you something about just how f***ed up the language is. Way too much design by committee after the initial versions... Way too much effort to remain backwards compatible with C. Personally I'm really looking forward to the day when Digital Mars' D language has matured a bit more so I can say goodbye to C++.
08/06/2003 (7:07 pm)
Quote:
I'm sure thats a fact, because most people who 'just want to use the thing' have no bloody idea what their doing
They shouldn't have to know what they are doing beyond learning a VERY SIMPLE interface, just like you shouldn't have to learn the inner workings of a car beyond knowing how to work the pedals and learning shifting/steering. Not everyone is interested in computers for their own sake, some people (including some that are geniuses in other fields) just want their computers to be simple tools that help out with their non-computercentric work and do simple things like web browsing, email, etc.
Quote:
As for .net... well. nearly every program ive tried that was built on it required the .net runtimes and libs. Thats not cross platform.
And the programs you build under Linux need the glibc runtime and associated libs. The programs you build under Java need the Java runtime and libs. What is your point?
Quote:
C# wont bear any resemblance to C++ soon
Why would they go and make drastic incompatible changes to the language while they are trying to build up a developer base? If anything C# is becoming MORE C++ like with the addition of generics (ala C++ templates), etc. And is moving away from C++ such a bad idea?
I use C++ both professionally and personally because practically speaking it is the best choice for high performance code, but the language really sucks in a multitude of ways. The fact that the language specification is like 1000 pages is ridiculous. The fact that there is no compiler on the market that is 100% C++ standard compliant should tell you something about just how f***ed up the language is. Way too much design by committee after the initial versions... Way too much effort to remain backwards compatible with C. Personally I'm really looking forward to the day when Digital Mars' D language has matured a bit more so I can say goodbye to C++.
#18
my point with .net is its not crossplatform, any program built under linux using standard glibc is able to be ported to windows easy.
.net isnt able to be ported to mac or linux without an interpreter for the .net framework calls.
Java is cross platform, or it was until M$ decided to piss around with it and try and integrate windows only stuff into it. Atleast Sun is trying to mantain the standard.
C# comparision to C++, i must have typed it wrong
I meant, C# being a windows specific language, M$ is trying to make it similar to C++ (basterdised version of) so that programmers could migrate to it easily....
Comparing cars to computers isnt very good...
Most people know how to maintain a car, eg, check oil, fill up with gas, clean it, change gears, know what most parts are and so on.
Not so with computers, a vast majority of people would have no idea what a harddisk is and why you should do a defrag and get rid of old files, what a virus actualy does (apart from bad things that they get told about).
Why you really need a firewall or what it does for always on connections \.
No matter what way you look at it a computer is still alot differant to a car and you can never make a good comparision with each. (maybe to pda's and such you could).
I guess no language is going to be perfect for computers because of how complex they actualy are.
Unless you build an ultra highlevel language like some sort of scripting lang(but not scripting).
I could argue til im blue in the face and not make a hellofalot of differance, and i bet most of us could.
I just wish more people would develop crossplatform.
And just cause im using linux dosnt mean i think everything should be open source....
And heres a quote to lighten us up a bit.
"You possess a mind not merely twisted, but actually sprained."
08/06/2003 (7:39 pm)
Ok good points.my point with .net is its not crossplatform, any program built under linux using standard glibc is able to be ported to windows easy.
.net isnt able to be ported to mac or linux without an interpreter for the .net framework calls.
Java is cross platform, or it was until M$ decided to piss around with it and try and integrate windows only stuff into it. Atleast Sun is trying to mantain the standard.
C# comparision to C++, i must have typed it wrong
I meant, C# being a windows specific language, M$ is trying to make it similar to C++ (basterdised version of) so that programmers could migrate to it easily....
Comparing cars to computers isnt very good...
Most people know how to maintain a car, eg, check oil, fill up with gas, clean it, change gears, know what most parts are and so on.
Not so with computers, a vast majority of people would have no idea what a harddisk is and why you should do a defrag and get rid of old files, what a virus actualy does (apart from bad things that they get told about).
Why you really need a firewall or what it does for always on connections \.
No matter what way you look at it a computer is still alot differant to a car and you can never make a good comparision with each. (maybe to pda's and such you could).
I guess no language is going to be perfect for computers because of how complex they actualy are.
Unless you build an ultra highlevel language like some sort of scripting lang(but not scripting).
I could argue til im blue in the face and not make a hellofalot of differance, and i bet most of us could.
I just wish more people would develop crossplatform.
And just cause im using linux dosnt mean i think everything should be open source....
And heres a quote to lighten us up a bit.
"You possess a mind not merely twisted, but actually sprained."
#19
That said, after evaluating C# .NET as an alternative to Java, I've found c# currently far, far behind when it comes to Enterprise apps.
I think the current C# platform under .NET is a great alternative to VB, however.
08/06/2003 (9:01 pm)
I don't know if you've used C#, but it is much more similar to Java than C++.That said, after evaluating C# .NET as an alternative to Java, I've found c# currently far, far behind when it comes to Enterprise apps.
I think the current C# platform under .NET is a great alternative to VB, however.
#20
having worked as a mechanic during college I can state that the above assumption is EMPIRICALLY incorrect! And it is actually a great analogy. There are lots of brilliant scientists and artists that use computers everyday and have no idea how to format a drive much less partion a disk with one of the arcane linux tools.
There are lots of great race car drivers that have never turned a wrench and I am sure there are some great mechanical engineer somewhere designing engines that does not own a car or know how to drive.
And C# has almost nothing to do with C++ other than there is a 'C' in the name. C# is Java for windows with the safety removed.
Syntax != similar
The entire Crossplatform thing is WAAAAYYYYY over rated.
The one thing that Apple has done is prove that Unix CAN be made accessible to the people that want a TOOL to do work with and that don't use a computer "because it is fun" but because it is a necceary evil.
08/06/2003 (11:21 pm)
Quote:Comparing cars to computers isnt very good...
Most people know how to maintain a car, eg, check oil, fill up with gas, clean it, change gears, know what most parts are and so on.
having worked as a mechanic during college I can state that the above assumption is EMPIRICALLY incorrect! And it is actually a great analogy. There are lots of brilliant scientists and artists that use computers everyday and have no idea how to format a drive much less partion a disk with one of the arcane linux tools.
There are lots of great race car drivers that have never turned a wrench and I am sure there are some great mechanical engineer somewhere designing engines that does not own a car or know how to drive.
And C# has almost nothing to do with C++ other than there is a 'C' in the name. C# is Java for windows with the safety removed.
Syntax != similar
The entire Crossplatform thing is WAAAAYYYYY over rated.
The one thing that Apple has done is prove that Unix CAN be made accessible to the people that want a TOOL to do work with and that don't use a computer "because it is fun" but because it is a necceary evil.
Torque Owner Lukensteinz