Why not develop new language

[Prashant]

There are lot of dicussion on C# is much better than C++. Why there is
no language to compute C#. This way we are accepting monopoly of M$.
Why there is no group which seriously tring to develop new language
better than C#.

 

[Stephen Gordon]

There are lot of dicussion on C# is much better than C++. Why there is
no language to compute C#. This way we are accepting monopoly of M$.
Why there is no group which seriously tring to develop new language
better than C#.

Erm yeah. A lot of people more than likely find that C++ IS better than
C# for the tasks they do.

There is no 'best' language or anything like that and just because one
is newer certainly does not make it better.

-Steve

 

[Walter]

There are lot of dicussion on C# is much better than C++. Why there is
no language to compute C#. This way we are accepting monopoly of M$.
Why there is no group which seriously tring to develop new language
better than C#.

Check out the D Programming Language at www.digtialmars.com/d/ and decide
for yourself.

-Walter

 

[Johan Nilsson]

There are lot of dicussion on C# is much better than C++. Why there is
no language to compute C#. This way we are accepting monopoly of M$.

I won't dispute whether C# is better or worse than C++ (it's probably a bit
of both), but the important part is that C#/.NET isn't Windows only:
http://www.mono-project.com/about/index.html .

// Johan

 

[Rolf Magnus]

There are lot of dicussion on C# is much better than C++.

Some people think that, others don't. Anyway, define "better". Is a roadster
"better" than a truck? I'd say it depends on whether you want to cruise
around or to transport 5 tons of toothpicks.

Why there is no language to compute C#.

Compute? What do you mean by that?

This way we are accepting monopoly of M$.

We are? By using C++ even though someone says C# is better, I accept
Microsoft's monopoly? I don't get that logic.

Why there is no group which seriously tring to develop new language
better than C#.

Well, if you feel the need for that, start it. Nobody can stop you from
developing your own programming language and looking for other people to
help you in that. What do you think how C++ was created?

 

[Ioannis Vranos]

There are lot of dicussion on C# is much better than C++. Why there is
no language to compute C#. This way we are accepting monopoly of M$.
Why there is no group which seriously tring to develop new language
better than C#.

Is there any C# construct that is not supported by C++?






Regards,

Ioannis Vranos

http://www23.brinkster.com/noicys

 

[tom_usenet]

There are lot of dicussion on C# is much better than C++. Why there is
no language to compute C#. This way we are accepting monopoly of M$.

Have you heard of Java? It is a very similar language to C#, and
requires a similar VM based execution environment to run in. The
biggest benefit is that it is portable to devices from desktop PCs to
mobile phones, whereas C# currently only runs on Windows and possibly
Linux (the Mono project).

Why there is no group which seriously tring to develop new language
better than C#.

Java already exists; if you don't want to follow the Microsoft route,
then Java is a similar alternative.

If you want a compiled, more efficient language, then C and C++ fill
that niche quite well, but I agree there is room for a better and
better marketed language. Creating the language isn't the problem,
marketing it with sufficient force to gain as much market exposure as
Java and C# enjoy is the problem.

Perhaps we need IBM to get behind a superior compiled language?

Tom

 

[Ioannis Vranos]

Have you heard of Java? It is a very similar language to C#, and
requires a similar VM based execution environment to run in. The
biggest benefit is that it is portable to devices from desktop PCs to
mobile phones, whereas C# currently only runs on Windows and possibly
Linux (the Mono project).




Java already exists; if you don't want to follow the Microsoft route,
then Java is a similar alternative.

If you want a compiled, more efficient language, then C and C++ fill
that niche quite well, but I agree there is room for a better and
better marketed language. Creating the language isn't the problem,
marketing it with sufficient force to gain as much market exposure as
Java and C# enjoy is the problem.

Perhaps we need IBM to get behind a superior compiled language?

C# programmers are like Java ones. You see only them come, exactly like
the Java ones, to bother C++ newsgroups of their language superiority.

Thus demonstrating their ignorance. C++ is superior to C# in all aspects
even in .NET world.

But I will not expand now on that, I want to tire him a bit.






Regards,

Ioannis Vranos

http://www23.brinkster.com/noicys

 

[Gernot Frisch]

Is there any C# construct that is not supported by C++?

Nice one. I join this statement.

 

[Stewart Gordon]

On 1 Sep 2004 00:23:19 -0700, (e-mail address removed) (Prashant)
wrote:

Java already exists; if you don't want to follow the Microsoft route,
then Java is a similar alternative.

C++, C# and Java aren't better or worse than each other. Just different.

Each has features that the others don't.

http://www.digitalmars.com/d/comparison.html

If you want a compiled, more efficient language, then C and C++ fill
that niche quite well, but I agree there is room for a better and
better marketed language.

<snip>

All four languages do get compiled; moreover, all of them probably can
be compiled to native code. As for efficiency - I guess it depends on
what you do with them, and how good the respective compilers are at
optimising.

Stewart.

 

[Peter Koch Larsen]

Nice one. I join this statement.

Okay .... then perhaps you can tell me what it means? I read it as
"everything can be done if you program in assembly" ;-)

/Peter

 

[Ioannis Vranos]

Okay .... then perhaps you can tell me what it means? I read it as
"everything can be done if you program in assembly" ;-)

C++ is a multi-paradigm language and supports 4 paradigms. The Object
Oriented programming paradigm, the generic programming paradigm
(templates), the procedural programming paradigm and the modular
programming paradigm (namespaces).

Each paradigm is supported *well* with optimal space and time efficiencies.

For OO in particular, that multiple inheritance is supported along with
abstract interfaces etc.


C# currently supports only 1 paradigm, the OO one and this not
completely, but only single inheritance and multiple inheritance only
for interfaces.


These from a paradigm perspective.






Regards,

Ioannis Vranos

http://www23.brinkster.com/noicys

 

[Howard]

Each paradigm is supported *well* with optimal space and time efficiencies.

"Optimal" is a pretty strong term, isn't it? Can you demonstrate that, or
point me to a paper that demonstrates how C++ is "optimal" in any particular
fashion? After all, it's a quality-of-implementation issue, isn't it? I'm
pretty sure one could write a C++ compiler that produced extremely
inefficient code. Not to mention that when optimizing for space, one often
sacrifices time efficiency, and vice-versa.

(Hmmm...ever notice that when someone says "Not to mention...", they go
ahead and mention it? )

-Howard

 

[Howard]

C# programmers are like Java ones. You see only them come, exactly like
the Java ones, to bother C++ newsgroups of their language superiority.

I'd say that C# programmers are much like C++ programmers. They do the work
they're paid to do.

Thus demonstrating their ignorance. C++ is superior to C# in all aspects
even in .NET world.

But of course EVERYONE knows that Delphi beats them both!

-Howard

 

[tom_usenet]

C++, C# and Java aren't better or worse than each other. Just different.

Right. Did you misread "similar" as "superior"?

<snip>

All four languages do get compiled; moreover, all of them probably can
be compiled to native code.

For that matter, there is a freestanding C++ implementation (Managed
C++) that can be compiled to bytecode.

As for efficiency - I guess it depends on

what you do with them, and how good the respective compilers are at
optimising.

Yes, I suppose I should have said a "runtime efficient language". That
is, one designed with priniciples such as "what you don't use you
don't pay for" and where speed is not traded for safety at a language
feature level (although obviously libraries should be able to make
such design choices if they wish).

Basically, a language suitable for games programming and systems
programming as well as server and applications programming.

Tom

 

[Howard]

Is there any C# construct that is not supported by C++?

Yes. The "try...finally" construct comes to mind. While we have RAII in
C++, which *may* be better, I've used the same try..finally construct
extensively in Delphi (Pascal), and found it quite useful. C++ has no such
construct. (I'm not saying it should, mind you, just answering your
question. )

-Howard

 

[Jeff]

I won't dispute whether C# is better or worse than C++ (it's probably a bit
of both), but the important part is that C#/.NET isn't Windows only:
http://www.mono-project.com/about/index.html .

I admire the skill and courage of the people trying to port C# and
..Net to Linux, but strategically speaking, it only re-enforces
Microsoft's dominance. Even if the mono project got to the point of
100% compatibility, which would be an unprecedented feat, it would
only confirm that Microsoft has developed a really great system.

Everyone working on alternatives to M$ products would be better served
to develop something totally different from M$, and preferably
something better. Invent a new language. Or promote and polish some
other language like Python or Haskell.

 

[Ioannis Vranos]

"Optimal" is a pretty strong term, isn't it? Can you demonstrate that, or
point me to a paper that demonstrates how C++ is "optimal" in any particular
fashion? After all, it's a quality-of-implementation issue, isn't it? I'm
pretty sure one could write a C++ compiler that produced extremely
inefficient code. Not to mention that when optimizing for space, one often
sacrifices time efficiency, and vice-versa.

(Hmmm...ever notice that when someone says "Not to mention...", they go
ahead and mention it? )

http://www.research.att.com/~bs/esc99.html

http://www23.brinkster.com/noicys/docs/ms-speaking-cpp.pdf

http://www.research.att.com/~bs/crc.pdf

http://www.biltek.ieee.metu.edu.tr/sayi/mayis01/bs_eng.html






Regards,

Ioannis Vranos

http://www23.brinkster.com/noicys

 

[Ioannis Vranos]

A language is worth little without a consistant class library. This is
where C# shines brighter than Java and definately C++ (STL/ATL/MFC bla
bla...)

Now we got ourselves in this C# thing, but anyway. You know C#... has
not any standard library.






Regards,

Ioannis Vranos

http://www23.brinkster.com/noicys

 

[Casper]

Nice one. I join this statement.

A language is worth little without a consistant class library. This is
where C# shines brighter than Java and definately C++ (STL/ATL/MFC bla
bla...)

/Casper