Coffeehouse Thread

35 posts

A Petition to 'Save' C# !!!

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    Sabot

    DomXML Demsak believes that C# is turning into bloatware with all the new functions and features and so it's getting harder to use.

    Sign-up here if you agree.

    Personally, I don't agree, but it's something that we can debate here. (Best place for this debate to happen if you ask me!)

    So do you think he has a point?

    Well I do remember that Microsoft did bloat out old VB with loads of rubbish in VB6 that was no good to man nor beast, so perhaps he's got a point.



  • User profile image
    TommyCarlier

    I think the new features in C# 2.0 (and what I've seen from C# 3.0) really improve the language a lot. I believe that things like generics actually make C# more elegant. What do you like more? This:

       ArrayList x = new ArrayList();
       ...
       int a = (int)x[i];

    Or this:

       List<int> x = new List<int>();
       ...
       int a = x[i];

    In C# 3.0, the first line can even be reduced to:

       var x = new List<int>();

  • User profile image
    eagle

    Sabot wrote:
    DomXML Demsak believes that C# is turning into bloatware with all the new functions and features and so it's getting harder to use.

    Sign-up here if you agree.

    Personally, I don't agree, but it's something that we can debate here. (Best place for this debate to happen if you ask me!)

    So do you think he has a point?

    Well I do remember that Microsoft did bloat out old VB with loads of rubbish in VB6 that was no good to man nor beast, so perhaps he's got a point.





    It was a joke, but it's great to see that you read DonXML's blog!

  • User profile image
    Tom Servo

    God forbid if someone would actually try to improve a language!

  • User profile image
    irascian

    It was a joke, but it's not hard to see why many would assume it was real.

    The fact is that C# is getting more complex and it's no longer the 'VB with semicolons' that it first appeared to be.

    It's getting more powerful which means it's getting more difficult to get to grips with all of its subtleties and complexity. If you don't have a strong OO background and are the traditional self-taught VBA or VB guy it will be a total nightmare trying to follow some of the code examples that are appearing with all the new announcements.

    Is that a bad thing? No. You still have VB.NET to make life a bit easier.

    Will it make it more difficult for the 'traditional' VB6 programmer to transition (I say this as a VB6 programmer myself who made the switch to C# when it first shipped)?. Absolutely.

    The big challenge for Microsoft is in retaining that 'hobbyist' market - much of which is responsible for Microsoft's huge success in the marketplace. VB.NET is considered by many to be too complex and it will be interesting to see how their efforts to 'keep things simple' for that market pan out with all the new features coming in.

  • User profile image
    JChung2006

    VB.NET 9.0 is more like C# 3.0 than you realize.

    You don't have to use the new features if you don't want to.  As long as your old code still works, you're fine.  That's the major source of contention from VB6->VB.NET migration -- not that they added all these cool new features to VB but that they broke backwards compatibility with VB6.

  • User profile image
    Manip

    irascian wrote:
    Will it make it more difficult for the 'traditional' VB6 programmer to transition (I say this as a VB6 programmer myself who made the switch to C# when it first shipped)?. Absolutely.


    That is extremely insulting... You make it sounds as if *all* VBA programmers haven't ever used OO and are just idiots with a compiler... I for one have yet to have trouble following the new features in 1.0, 2.0 or 3.0 with the slight exception of that language query stuff... Very strange ... Kinda cool.




  • User profile image
    JChung2006

    I don't think irascian was trying to characterize all VB programmers as "Mort."  There are some though that aren't familiar with OO.  Believe you me, I've met several in my years working on VB development teams.  The pages of global variable declarations and thousand-line Subs and functions still give me nightmares.

  • User profile image
    irascian

    If you want to see my comment about the 'typical' VB programmer as an insult then frankly that's your problem, not mine (albeit a problem you've exhibited on many postings here in the past that I've usually just avoided getting involved in)

    There's a reason I didn't use the word 'all' and why I used the word 'typical' and put it in quotes instead, just as there was a reason why I pointed out I am a former VB programmer myself. 

    Incidentally one of the reasons Ford moved from VB6 to C# when .Net came out was as a way of weeding out the 'typical' VB6 programmers who just didn't seem to 'get' OO. The move to C# was a way of retaining only the good ones who realised that the change in syntax moving from VB to C# wasn't the key difference - it was 'getting' OO that was important. Sadly in my experience too many VB programmers DON'T get it (and I'm sure there are some C# programmers who don't get it either, but I think they're a much lower percentage).

    Of course there are some excellent VB guys out there (Ted Pattison is a name that immediately springs to mind, Billy Hollis is anothr) but I can't help remembering Don Box's quote at TechEd a few years ago when he asked how many people in the audience were VB programmers and then jokingly dissed them saying "Everybody knows that VB programmers are just failed marketeers and journalists".

    I hadn't intended to turn this into a religious war, and indeed one or two of the best programmers I've worked with are people who trained themselves on VBA and then progressed to VB. On the other hand I've had to deal with a hell of a lot of really bad code at clients where "the guy in accounts wrote it after teaching himself VB".  Maybe I've been lucky but I haven't seen many bad C# or C++ programmers.

    The argument about the complexity of the language is a similar one to the argument about web standards. Proper use of CSS makes it difficult to impossible for the "average" man on the street to write his own web site, where HTML is pretty straightforward. In the same way I think that the new constructs, or more importantly some of the newer code examples being thrown around in the newer versions of the languages are too complex for the guy who's learnt a bit of VBA and written a few simple Windows forms applications to get to grips with.

    Your mileage may vary.

  • User profile image
    JChung2006

    Beer28 wrote:

    People are never going to be happy with .NET or C# once they learn C++ and realize their code takes up about 1000th of the memory footprint and runs about 10 times faster.

    It's just a fact. Beginner languages and frameworks are quickly outgrown. People are smarter than MS devs give them credit for.

    If that's true, then why is Java more popular than C++?

    I learned C++ long before I learned .NET or C# (long before either existed) and quite frankly don't miss it, because quite frankly I really don't want to write 10-20 lines of C++ when I could do the same damn thing in 1-5 lines of C# or VB.NET.

  • User profile image
    Manip

    Call me a lazy (I need to watch my language) if you want but I just love the idea of being able to go  x = null;  without having to ask myself -- "Is this a nullable type?"...

  • User profile image
    JChung2006

    Beer28 wrote:
    C and C++ are WAY more popular for Desktop applications. Probably by a margin of 10,000 to 1.

    You're kidding right?  There are significantly more VB/.NET custom business applications than there are C/C++ desktop applications.

  • User profile image
    JChung2006

    Beer28 wrote:

    Java is used for service applications like daemons, and xxx_d applications that don't need to have immediate results displayed to a user.

    Java's memory and performance footprint on the server though is a significant factor.  Or maybe it's not so significant, eh?  Else everyone would be writing their Web pages as ISAPI DLL's and C++ custom Apache modules?  Which they don't.
    Beer28 wrote:

    When you are distributing client applications like photoshop where you don't control the hardware, that's where it matters, and there are very few java client desktop applications. For that reason BTW.

    There are plenty of VB client applications running on business desktops all across the world, or maybe you've just chosen to selectively ignore the popularity of VB so that your "C++ is more popular" view isn't shattered by pesky things like fact and reality.

  • User profile image
    Detroit Muscle

    JChung2006 wrote:
    Beer28 wrote:C and C++ are WAY more popular for Desktop applications. Probably by a margin of 10,000 to 1.

    You're kidding right?  There are significantly more VB/.NET custom business applications than there are C/C++ desktop applications.


    The average automobile rolling off the assembly line has 30-40 networked ECUs. 16 million cars were sold in the US alone in 2004. Each of those ECUs runs software programmed in either assembly or C.

    That's 480-640 million computers that were sold through car dealerships. How many PCs are sold in the US every year? How many Severs?

    All you C#/VB/C++/Java fanboys can continue to argue about whos bloatware is more bloated, while us real programmers write the tight, efficient assembly and C code which allows civilization to function.

  • User profile image
    Deactivated User

    Comment removed at user's request.

  • User profile image
    Deactivated User

    Comment removed at user's request.

  • User profile image
    BenZila

    Detroit Muscle wrote:




    That's 480-640 million computers that were sold through car dealerships. How many PCs are sold in the US every year? How many Severs?

    All you C#/VB/C++/Java fanboys can continue to argue about whos bloatware is more bloated, while us real programmers write the tight, efficient assembly and C code which allows civilization to function.


    'Real programmers'

    Elitist alert.

  • User profile image
    ThomasAesir

    JChung2006 wrote:
    There are plenty of VB client applications running on business desktops all across the world, or maybe you've just chosen to selectively ignore the popularity of VB so that your 'C++ is more popular' view isn't shattered by pesky things like fact and reality.
    VB.NET and C# are all well and good for custom business applications where you control the enviroment but how many shrinkwrap applications get build in them? Hell, even Microsoft does't release shrinkwrap applications which require the .Net Framework.

Comments closed

Comments have been closed since this content was published more than 30 days ago, but if you'd like to continue the conversation, please create a new thread in our Forums, or Contact Us and let us know.