p2p.wrox.com Forums

Need to download code?

View our list of code downloads.


  Return to Index  

c_sharp thread: RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)


Message #1 by "imtiaz arif" <imtarif@h...> on Sun, 14 Jan 2001 13:12:04 -0000
hi there



I have heared that C#(C-Sharp) is platform independent like JAVA is it true.



Thanks

Message #2 by Imar Spaanjaars <Imar@S...> on Sun, 14 Jan 2001 23:03:34 +0100
No, this is not true (yet).

Currently the .NET runtime is required which only runs on Windows based 

systems. However, C# has been submitted to ECMA (the organization that 

standardized JavaScript amongst other things) so it may become an open 

language. If that is the case, other companies can start to develop 

runtimes / compilers etc for other platforms as well.



HtH



Imar





At 01:12 PM 1/14/2001 +0000, you wrote:

>hi there

>

>I have heared that C#(C-Sharp) is platform independent like JAVA is it true.

>

>Thanks





Message #3 by "Douglas Rohm" <dlr@m...> on Sun, 14 Jan 2001 16:21:45 -0500
At this time, it is *not* platform independent.  The structure of .NET is

extremely similar to Java's runtime.  The whole structure of .NET is the

Common Language Runtime (CLR).  If the language is CLR compliant, it simply

means that it is able to compile to the Intermediate Language (IL) for the

CLR.  The CLR at that point functions as the middle layer between the .NET

programs and the operating system.  To make .NET platform independent there

would need to be a CLR for the other platforms.  This has been the subject

of gossip lately.  Will MS create a CLR for the other platforms?  Who knows.

They haven't said anything about it.  Then, and only then, would *all* the

".NET langauges" be cross platform independent.



Personally, I hope MS does create CLR's for other platforms.  It will make

all of our lives much easier.  Even if third parties make the CLR's...all

the better.     :)



Douglas Rohm

dlr@m...





-----Original Message-----

From: imtiaz arif [mailto:imtarif@h...]

Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2001 8:12 AM

To: C # list

Subject: RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)





hi there



I have heared that C#(C-Sharp) is platform independent like JAVA is it true.



Thanks





Message #4 by "Christopher Duden" <Christopher_Duden@i...> on Fri, 26 Jan 2001 13:38:38 -0700
MS might take the initiative and create CLR's for other OS's although it

would be in other OS owners interest to do this themselves, provided the

CLR is standardized by the ECMA.  Window's has a huge software base and

all if not most software vendors who produce products for the Win

environment will be moving to .NET in the near future (when it is

available).  I hope all this happens, SUN has been rather jerky with

it's handling of JAVA, a platform independent solution which is a viable

alternative would be most welcome.



> Subject: RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)

> From: Imar Spaanjaars <Imar@S...>

> Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 23:03:34 +0100

> X-Message-Number: 1

>

> No, this is not true (yet).

> Currently the .NET runtime is required which only runs on Windows

> based

> systems. However, C# has been submitted to ECMA (the organization that

> standardized JavaScript amongst other things) so it may become an open

> language. If that is the case, other companies can start to develop

> runtimes / compilers etc for other platforms as well.

>

> HtH

>

> Imar

>

>

> At 01:12 PM 1/14/2001 +0000, you wrote:

> >hi there

> >

> >I have heared that C#(C-Sharp) is platform independent like JAVA is

> it true.

> >

> >Thanks

>

>

>

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

>

> Subject: RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)

> From: "Douglas Rohm" <dlr@m...>

> Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 16:21:45 -0500

> X-Message-Number: 2

>

> At this time, it is *not* platform independent.  The structure of .NET

> is

> extremely similar to Java's runtime.  The whole structure of .NET is

> the

> Common Language Runtime (CLR).  If the language is CLR compliant, it

> simply

> means that it is able to compile to the Intermediate Language (IL) for

> the

> CLR.  The CLR at that point functions as the middle layer between the

> .NET

> programs and the operating system.  To make .NET platform independent

> there

> would need to be a CLR for the other platforms.  This has been the

> subject

> of gossip lately.  Will MS create a CLR for the other platforms?  Who

> knows.

> They haven't said anything about it.  Then, and only then, would *all*

> the

> ".NET langauges" be cross platform independent.

>

> Personally, I hope MS does create CLR's for other platforms.  It will

> make

> all of our lives much easier.  Even if third parties make the

> CLR's...all

> the better.     :)

>

> Douglas Rohm

> dlr@m...

>

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: imtiaz arif [mailto:imtarif@h...]

> Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2001 8:12 AM

> To: C # list

> Subject: RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)

>

>

> hi there

>

> I have heared that C#(C-Sharp) is platform independent like JAVA is it

> true.

>

> Thanks

>

>

>

>

>

> ---

>

> END OF DIGEST

>

Message #5 by "a chavez" <achavez382@w...> on Mon, 29 Jan 2001 19:39:06 -0000
> Window's has a huge software base 



    Yes, very true...



> and all if not most 



    uh-oh, sweeping generalization approaching...



> software vendors who produce products for the Win

> environment will be moving to .NET in the near future (when it is

> available).  



    Aaaack.  This is ridiculous.  There is no .NET beyond 'frameworks'

(whitepapers), paid-for articles warning of instant career obsolescence if

we don't early-adopt (fritepapers), and betas that anyone downloading is

helping to debug.  And don't forget the 'SP3' rule...three service packs

until stability.

    

> I hope all this happens, SUN has been rather jerky with

> it's handling of JAVA, a platform independent solution which is a viable

> alternative would be most welcome.



    This, I agree with.  This will never happen.  There is no money trail

for MS to follow if they adapt their tools to not-in-Redmond OS's and

certainly  none to maintain them.



achavez



> > Subject: RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)

> > From: Imar Spaanjaars <Imar@S...>

> > Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 23:03:34 +0100

> > X-Message-Number: 1

> >

> > No, this is not true (yet).

> > Currently the .NET runtime is required which only runs on Windows

> > based

> > systems. However, C# has been submitted to ECMA (the organization that

> > standardized JavaScript amongst other things) so it may become an open

> > language. If that is the case, other companies can start to develop

> > runtimes / compilers etc for other platforms as well.

> >

> > HtH

> >

> > Imar

> >

> >

> > At 01:12 PM 1/14/2001 +0000, you wrote:

> > >hi there

> > >

> > >I have heared that C#(C-Sharp) is platform independent like JAVA is

> > it true.

> > >

> > >Thanks

> >

> >

> >

> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------

> >

> > Subject: RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)

> > From: "Douglas Rohm" <dlr@m...>

> > Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 16:21:45 -0500

> > X-Message-Number: 2

> >

> > At this time, it is *not* platform independent.  The structure of .NET

> > is

> > extremely similar to Java's runtime.  The whole structure of .NET is

> > the

> > Common Language Runtime (CLR).  If the language is CLR compliant, it

> > simply

> > means that it is able to compile to the Intermediate Language (IL) for

> > the

> > CLR.  The CLR at that point functions as the middle layer between the

> > .NET

> > programs and the operating system.  To make .NET platform independent

> > there

> > would need to be a CLR for the other platforms.  This has been the

> > subject

> > of gossip lately.  Will MS create a CLR for the other platforms?  Who

> > knows.

> > They haven't said anything about it.  Then, and only then, would *all*

> > the

> > ".NET langauges" be cross platform independent.

> >

> > Personally, I hope MS does create CLR's for other platforms.  It will

> > make

> > all of our lives much easier.  Even if third parties make the

> > CLR's...all

> > the better.     :)

> >

> > Douglas Rohm

> > dlr@m...

> >

> >

> > -----Original Message-----

> > From: imtiaz arif [mailto:imtarif@h...]

> > Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2001 8:12 AM

> > To: C # list

> > Subject: RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)

> >

> >

> > hi there

> >

> > I have heared that C#(C-Sharp) is platform independent like JAVA is it

> > true.

> >

> > Thanks

> >

> 
Message #6 by Bri&Liz <brianh@s...> on Mon, 29 Jan 2001 17:31:07 -0500
AChavez,



LOL! Good sense of humor. Hey! There is a .NET that you can use. It is a 

real massive beta dowload/CD. Be careful if you are a VB6 user as an errant 

double click on a VB file containing a GUI will pop you into Web Forms :o)



And C# is a real language as well.



Okay *sweeping generalization* C# will be a major hit on Java. Reason? 

Simple, it is Java only you can link libraries from any other language you 

have. I think it's better structured than Java as well. Mr. Hejlberg 

(formerly the doer of all things Delphi) used the best of Java and the best 

of C/C++. So there are more and better primitives and you can actually do 

something with strings (beside scratch your head wondering how you do mid() 

in Java).



Good day :o))



Brian



Message #7 by "Christopher Duden" <Christopher_Duden@i...> on Tue, 30 Jan 2001 11:02:21 -0700
	> and all if not most



	   >> uh-oh, sweeping generalization approaching...



	I work for a company whose "herd" are Fortune 500 companies who

use predominantly Microsoft Technologies -- all of them, that I am aware

of, are both looking forward to and planning for .NET.



	> software vendors who produce products for the Win

	> environment will be moving to .NET in the near future (when it

is

	> available).

	=09

		>>	Aaaack.  This is ridiculous.  There is no .NET

beyond 'frameworks'

		>>(whitepapers), paid-for articles warning of instant

career obsolescence if

		>>we don't early-adopt (fritepapers), and betas that

anyone downloading is

		>>helping to debug.  And don't forget the 'SP3'

rule...three service packs

		>>until stability.



		Is there a point in this somewhere, or are you simply

trolling.  Firstly I am in the software industry.  Secondly, My point

was that many companies do use Microsoft technologies besides their OS,

not to mention all the software written only for Windows ( I know it

hurts you to admit that ) and it would be advantageous for other OS

producers to produce a compliant CLR and take advantage of the huge base

of Windows applications which will be written to the CLR.  The CLR has

already been submitted to an international standards body and if

approved there is nothing to prevent other OS producers from taking

advantage of it.  NET is very real,  OF course you are right achavez,

.NET is a "phantom", I should know I have been using the "white papers"

to compile programs, create web services, windows services and windows

applications since mid last year in my Beta environment.  Unlike some

people I and my development team like to be ahead of the game when new

technologies are released.  As far as "DEBUGGING",  I also have an

opportunity for input into the project by participating in this

venture.<<<<waves his 'BE GONE TROLL' wand >>>>



	> I hope all this happens, SUN has been rather jerky with

	> it's handling of JAVA, a platform independent solution which

is a viable

	> alternative would be most welcome.



		    >>This, I agree with. 





		Ah, you agree with something, you are not without hope.



			>>This will never happen.  There is no money

trail

			>>for MS to follow if they adapt their tools to

not-in-Redmond OS's and

			>>certainly  none to maintain them.





			 If I were you Achavez, I wouldn't write that

chapter yet.



		>>achavez"



		Gesundheit!  Heheh, couldn't pass it up.  I don't know

why but the second I saw your sig I thought of Dilbert in this Sunday's

paper.



<<<<CD>>>>

	

>  -----Original Message-----

> From: 	"C # list digest" <c_sharp@p...>@INFOIMAGE 

> Sent:	Tuesday, January 30, 2001 1:01 AM

> To:	c_sharp digest recipients

> Subject:	c_sharp digest: January 29, 2001

>

> C_SHARP Digest for Monday, January 29, 2001.

>

> 1. RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)

> 2. RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)

>

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

>

> Subject: RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)

> From: "a chavez" <achavez382@w...>

> Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 19:39:06 -0000

> X-Message-Number: 1

>

> > Window's has a huge software base

>

>     Yes, very true...

>

> > and all if not most

>

>     uh-oh, sweeping generalization approaching...

>

> > software vendors who produce products for the Win

> > environment will be moving to .NET in the near future (when it is

> > available).

>

>     Aaaack.  This is ridiculous.  There is no .NET beyond 'frameworks'

> (whitepapers), paid-for articles warning of instant career

> obsolescence if

> we don't early-adopt (fritepapers), and betas that anyone downloading

> is

> helping to debug.  And don't forget the 'SP3' rule...three service

> packs

> until stability.

>

> > I hope all this happens, SUN has been rather jerky with

> > it's handling of JAVA, a platform independent solution which is a

> viable

> > alternative would be most welcome.

>

>     This, I agree with.  This will never happen.  There is no money

> trail

> for MS to follow if they adapt their tools to not-in-Redmond OS's and

> certainly  none to maintain them.

>

> achavez

>

> > > Subject: RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)

> > > From: Imar Spaanjaars <Imar@S...>

> > > Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 23:03:34 +0100

> > > X-Message-Number: 1

> > >=3D20

> > > No, this is not true (yet).

> > > Currently the .NET runtime is required which only runs on Windows

> > > based

> > > systems. However, C# has been submitted to ECMA (the organization

> that

> > > standardized JavaScript amongst other things) so it may become an

> open

> > > language. If that is the case, other companies can start to

> develop

> > > runtimes / compilers etc for other platforms as well.

> > >=3D20

> > > HtH

> > >=3D20

> > > Imar

> > >=3D20

> > >=3D20

> > > At 01:12 PM 1/14/2001 +0000, you wrote:

> > > >hi there

> > > >

> > > >I have heared that C#(C-Sharp) is platform independent like JAVA

> is

> > > it true.

> > > >

> > > >Thanks

> > >=3D20

> > >=3D20

> > >=3D20

> > >

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

> > >=3D20

> > > Subject: RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)

> > > From: "Douglas Rohm" <dlr@m...>

> > > Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 16:21:45 -0500

> > > X-Message-Number: 2

> > >=3D20

> > > At this time, it is *not* platform independent.  The structure of

> .NET

> > > is

> > > extremely similar to Java's runtime.  The whole structure of .NET

> is

> > > the

> > > Common Language Runtime (CLR).  If the language is CLR compliant,

> it

> > > simply

> > > means that it is able to compile to the Intermediate Language (IL)

> for

> > > the

> > > CLR.  The CLR at that point functions as the middle layer between

> the

> > > .NET

> > > programs and the operating system.  To make .NET platform

> independent

> > > there

> > > would need to be a CLR for the other platforms.  This has been the

> > > subject

> > > of gossip lately.  Will MS create a CLR for the other platforms?

> Who

> > > knows.

> > > They haven't said anything about it.  Then, and only then, would

> *all*

> > > the

> > > ".NET langauges" be cross platform independent.

> > >=3D20

> > > Personally, I hope MS does create CLR's for other platforms.  It

> will

> > > make

> > > all of our lives much easier.  Even if third parties make the

> > > CLR's...all

> > > the better.     :)

> > >=3D20

> > > Douglas Rohm

> > > dlr@m...

> > >=3D20

> > >=3D20

> > > -----Original Message-----

> > > From: imtiaz arif [mailto:imtarif@h...]

> > > Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2001 8:12 AM

> > > To: C # list

> > > Subject: RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)

> > >=3D20

> > >=3D20

> > > hi there

> > >=3D20

> > > I have heared that C#(C-Sharp) is platform independent like JAVA

> is it

> > > true.

> > >=3D20

> > > Thanks

> > >=3D20

> >

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

>

> Subject: RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)

> From: Bri&Liz <brianh@s...>

> Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 17:31:07 -0500

> X-Message-Number: 2

>

> AChavez,

>

> LOL! Good sense of humor. Hey! There is a .NET that you can use. It is

> a

> real massive beta dowload/CD. Be careful if you are a VB6 user as an

> errant

> double click on a VB file containing a GUI will pop you into Web Forms

> :o)

>

> And C# is a real language as well.

>

> Okay *sweeping generalization* C# will be a major hit on Java. Reason?

> Simple, it is Java only you can link libraries from any other language

> you

> have. I think it's better structured than Java as well. Mr. Hejlberg

> (formerly the doer of all things Delphi) used the best of Java and the

> best

> of C/C++. So there are more and better primitives and you can actually

> do

> something with strings (beside scratch your head wondering how you do

> mid()

> in Java).

>

> Good day :o))

>

> Brian

>

Message #8 by Greg Piatigorski <PiatigorskiG@w...> on Tue, 30 Jan 2001 11:03:54 -0800
Christopher,



You should have added that it just happens the biggest application provider

in the Apple world is still the big, bad Microsoft. I am talking about

business software, of course. My only wish is that MS could turn the time

back and NOT bail Apple out of it's misery... They did the same with Corel,

shame the world is not paying attention to such simple things.



As it happens, companies such as Merrill Lynch and AmEx are heavily invested

in .NET as we speak and there are Web sites already powered by the

technology. Funny how this "mythical" beast is actually a reality.



If only I could convince my current client to go .NET way... (sigh)



Greg



-----Original Message-----

From: Christopher Duden [mailto:Christopher_Duden@i...]

Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 10:02 AM

To: C # list

Subject: RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)





	> and all if not most



	   >> uh-oh, sweeping generalization approaching...



	I work for a company whose "herd" are Fortune 500 companies who

use predominantly Microsoft Technologies -- all of them, that I am aware

of, are both looking forward to and planning for .NET.



	> software vendors who produce products for the Win

	> environment will be moving to .NET in the near future (when it

is

	> available).

		

		>>	Aaaack.  This is ridiculous.  There is no .NET

beyond 'frameworks'

		>>(whitepapers), paid-for articles warning of instant

career obsolescence if

		>>we don't early-adopt (fritepapers), and betas that

anyone downloading is

		>>helping to debug.  And don't forget the 'SP3'

rule...three service packs

		>>until stability.



		Is there a point in this somewhere, or are you simply

trolling.  Firstly I am in the software industry.  Secondly, My point

was that many companies do use Microsoft technologies besides their OS,

not to mention all the software written only for Windows ( I know it

hurts you to admit that ) and it would be advantageous for other OS

producers to produce a compliant CLR and take advantage of the huge base

of Windows applications which will be written to the CLR.  The CLR has

already been submitted to an international standards body and if

approved there is nothing to prevent other OS producers from taking

advantage of it.  NET is very real,  OF course you are right achavez,

.NET is a "phantom", I should know I have been using the "white papers"

to compile programs, create web services, windows services and windows

applications since mid last year in my Beta environment.  Unlike some

people I and my development team like to be ahead of the game when new

technologies are released.  As far as "DEBUGGING",  I also have an

opportunity for input into the project by participating in this

venture.<<<<waves his 'BE GONE TROLL' wand >>>>



	> I hope all this happens, SUN has been rather jerky with

	> it's handling of JAVA, a platform independent solution which

is a viable

	> alternative would be most welcome.



		    >>This, I agree with.  





		Ah, you agree with something, you are not without hope. 



			>>This will never happen.  There is no money

trail

			>>for MS to follow if they adapt their tools to

not-in-Redmond OS's and

			>>certainly  none to maintain them.





			 If I were you Achavez, I wouldn't write that

chapter yet.



		>>achavez"



		Gesundheit!  Heheh, couldn't pass it up.  I don't know

why but the second I saw your sig I thought of Dilbert in this Sunday's

paper.



<<<<CD>>>>

	 

>  -----Original Message-----

> From: 	"C # list digest" <c_sharp@p...>@INFOIMAGE  

> Sent:	Tuesday, January 30, 2001 1:01 AM

> To:	c_sharp digest recipients

> Subject:	c_sharp digest: January 29, 2001

> 

> C_SHARP Digest for Monday, January 29, 2001.

> 

> 1. RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)

> 2. RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)

> 

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

> 

> Subject: RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)

> From: "a chavez" <achavez382@w...>

> Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 19:39:06 -0000

> X-Message-Number: 1

> 

> > Window's has a huge software base

> 

>     Yes, very true...

> 

> > and all if not most

> 

>     uh-oh, sweeping generalization approaching...

> 

> > software vendors who produce products for the Win

> > environment will be moving to .NET in the near future (when it is

> > available).

> 

>     Aaaack.  This is ridiculous.  There is no .NET beyond 'frameworks'

> (whitepapers), paid-for articles warning of instant career

> obsolescence if

> we don't early-adopt (fritepapers), and betas that anyone downloading

> is

> helping to debug.  And don't forget the 'SP3' rule...three service

> packs

> until stability.

> 

> > I hope all this happens, SUN has been rather jerky with

> > it's handling of JAVA, a platform independent solution which is a

> viable

> > alternative would be most welcome.

> 

>     This, I agree with.  This will never happen.  There is no money

> trail

> for MS to follow if they adapt their tools to not-in-Redmond OS's and

> certainly  none to maintain them.

> 

> achavez

> 

> > > Subject: RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)

> > > From: Imar Spaanjaars <Imar@S...>

> > > Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 23:03:34 +0100

> > > X-Message-Number: 1

> > >

> > > No, this is not true (yet).

> > > Currently the .NET runtime is required which only runs on Windows

> > > based

> > > systems. However, C# has been submitted to ECMA (the organization

> that

> > > standardized JavaScript amongst other things) so it may become an

> open

> > > language. If that is the case, other companies can start to

> develop

> > > runtimes / compilers etc for other platforms as well.

> > >

> > > HtH

> > >

> > > Imar

> > >

> > >

> > > At 01:12 PM 1/14/2001 +0000, you wrote:

> > > >hi there

> > > >

> > > >I have heared that C#(C-Sharp) is platform independent like JAVA

> is

> > > it true.

> > > >

> > > >Thanks

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

> > >

> > > Subject: RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)

> > > From: "Douglas Rohm" <dlr@m...>

> > > Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 16:21:45 -0500

> > > X-Message-Number: 2

> > >

> > > At this time, it is *not* platform independent.  The structure of

> .NET

> > > is

> > > extremely similar to Java's runtime.  The whole structure of .NET

> is

> > > the

> > > Common Language Runtime (CLR).  If the language is CLR compliant,

> it

> > > simply

> > > means that it is able to compile to the Intermediate Language (IL)

> for

> > > the

> > > CLR.  The CLR at that point functions as the middle layer between

> the

> > > .NET

> > > programs and the operating system.  To make .NET platform

> independent

> > > there

> > > would need to be a CLR for the other platforms.  This has been the

> > > subject

> > > of gossip lately.  Will MS create a CLR for the other platforms?

> Who

> > > knows.

> > > They haven't said anything about it.  Then, and only then, would

> *all*

> > > the

> > > ".NET langauges" be cross platform independent.

> > >

> > > Personally, I hope MS does create CLR's for other platforms.  It

> will

> > > make

> > > all of our lives much easier.  Even if third parties make the

> > > CLR's...all

> > > the better.     :)

> > >

> > > Douglas Rohm

> > > dlr@m...

> > >

> > >

> > > -----Original Message-----

> > > From: imtiaz arif [mailto:imtarif@h...]

> > > Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2001 8:12 AM

> > > To: C # list

> > > Subject: RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)

> > >

> > >

> > > hi there

> > >

> > > I have heared that C#(C-Sharp) is platform independent like JAVA

> is it

> > > true.

> > >

> > > Thanks

> > >

> >

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

> 

> Subject: RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)

> From: Bri&Liz <brianh@s...>

> Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 17:31:07 -0500

> X-Message-Number: 2

> 

> AChavez,

> 

> LOL! Good sense of humor. Hey! There is a .NET that you can use. It is

> a

> real massive beta dowload/CD. Be careful if you are a VB6 user as an

> errant

> double click on a VB file containing a GUI will pop you into Web Forms

> :o)

> 

> And C# is a real language as well.

> 

> Okay *sweeping generalization* C# will be a major hit on Java. Reason?

> Simple, it is Java only you can link libraries from any other language

> you

> have. I think it's better structured than Java as well. Mr. Hejlberg

> (formerly the doer of all things Delphi) used the best of Java and the

> best

> of C/C++. So there are more and better primitives and you can actually

> do

> something with strings (beside scratch your head wondering how you do

> mid()

> in Java).

> 

> Good day :o))

> 

> Brian

> 

Message #9 by "a chavez" <achavez382@w...> on Tue, 30 Jan 2001 20:20:01 -0000
I apologize if I hurt your feelings, Chris.  I was qustioning your

generalizations and what I felt was ill-advised direction to the

_original_ question, not your background or your, uh, name.



I work for a F500 and a conservative one at that.  I am a Windows

programmer, corporate programming, not software industry.  I will be using

.NET when it's done, not before.  Having been a participant in several

beta programs, "technology previews", I don't recommend it unless you have

the time for r/d.  Generally, we don't, so we let companies like yours to

do the sorting out, and associated hemmoraging, and either pay for the

wisdom or gather it vicariously through publications.



I will be using c#.  It appears to have the elegant library structure 

that I admire in Java, an accessible syntax and is produced by a reputable

tool company.  Spare me the boosterism of how predominant they

are...market share is  popularity contest, not quality review: they are

good, not great.  Borland is great and we know where they are.



But call it what it is.  The CLR is a translator (as Java VM, as UCSD

Pascal).  Meta-code, managed code, is p-code, as is byte code.  C#'s

syntax is an evolution of Java, which is an evolution of C.  To mis-quote

some apple PR toadie, This is evolution not revolution.



And this is what I will be using, not the marketing.  I won't be slapping

labels on rewrapped code and calling it cutting edge.  I won't even

attempt to move our vb6 code into .net using translation recipes:

maintenance cycle until we rewrite for the new platform.



Resist the hype.



ps: no troll here, just brand new to the list.



Aaron Chavez

achavez382@w...





> > and all if not most

> 

> 	   >> uh-oh, sweeping generalization approaching...

> 

> 	I work for a company whose "herd" are Fortune 500 companies who

> use predominantly Microsoft Technologies -- all of them, that I am aware

> of, are both looking forward to and planning for .NET.

> 

> 	> software vendors who produce products for the Win

> 	> environment will be moving to .NET in the near future (when it

> is

> 	> available).

> 	=09

> 		>>	Aaaack.  This is ridiculous.  There is no .NET

> beyond 'frameworks'

> 		>>(whitepapers), paid-for articles warning of instant

> career obsolescence if

> 		>>we don't early-adopt (fritepapers), and betas that

> anyone downloading is

> 		>>helping to debug.  And don't forget the 'SP3'

> rule...three service packs

> 		>>until stability.

> 

> 		Is there a point in this somewhere, or are you simply

> trolling.  Firstly I am in the software industry.  Secondly, My point

> was that many companies do use Microsoft technologies besides their OS,

> not to mention all the software written only for Windows ( I know it

> hurts you to admit that ) and it would be advantageous for other OS

> producers to produce a compliant CLR and take advantage of the huge base

> of Windows applications which will be written to the CLR.  The CLR has

> already been submitted to an international standards body and if

> approved there is nothing to prevent other OS producers from taking

> advantage of it.  NET is very real,  OF course you are right achavez,

> .NET is a "phantom", I should know I have been using the "white papers"

> to compile programs, create web services, windows services and windows

> applications since mid last year in my Beta environment.  Unlike some

> people I and my development team like to be ahead of the game when new

> technologies are released.  As far as "DEBUGGING",  I also have an

> opportunity for input into the project by participating in this

> venture.<<<<waves his 'BE GONE TROLL' wand >>>>

> 

> 	> I hope all this happens, SUN has been rather jerky with

> 	> it's handling of JAVA, a platform independent solution which

> is a viable

> 	> alternative would be most welcome.

> 

> 		    >>This, I agree with. 

> 

> 

> 		Ah, you agree with something, you are not without hope.

> 

> 			>>This will never happen.  There is no money

> trail

> 			>>for MS to follow if they adapt their tools to

> not-in-Redmond OS's and

> 			>>certainly  none to maintain them.

> 

> 

> 			 If I were you Achavez, I wouldn't write that

> chapter yet.

> 

> 		>>achavez"

> 

> 		Gesundheit!  Heheh, couldn't pass it up.  I don't know

> why but the second I saw your sig I thought of Dilbert in this Sunday's

> paper.

> 

> <<<<CD>>>>

> 	

> >  -----Original Message-----

> > From: 	"C # list digest" <c_sharp@p...>@INFOIMAGE 

> > Sent:	Tuesday, January 30, 2001 1:01 AM

> > To:	c_sharp digest recipients

> > Subject:	c_sharp digest: January 29, 2001

> >

> > C_SHARP Digest for Monday, January 29, 2001.

> >

> > 1. RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)

> > 2. RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)

> >

> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------

> >

> > Subject: RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)

> > From: "a chavez" <achavez382@w...>

> > Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 19:39:06 -0000

> > X-Message-Number: 1

> >

> > > Window's has a huge software base

> >

> >     Yes, very true...

> >

> > > and all if not most

> >

> >     uh-oh, sweeping generalization approaching...

> >

> > > software vendors who produce products for the Win

> > > environment will be moving to .NET in the near future (when it is

> > > available).

> >

> >     Aaaack.  This is ridiculous.  There is no .NET beyond 'frameworks'

> > (whitepapers), paid-for articles warning of instant career

> > obsolescence if

> > we don't early-adopt (fritepapers), and betas that anyone downloading

> > is

> > helping to debug.  And don't forget the 'SP3' rule...three service

> > packs

> > until stability.

> >

> > > I hope all this happens, SUN has been rather jerky with

> > > it's handling of JAVA, a platform independent solution which is a

> > viable

> > > alternative would be most welcome.

> >

> >     This, I agree with.  This will never happen.  There is no money

> > trail

> > for MS to follow if they adapt their tools to not-in-Redmond OS's and

> > certainly  none to maintain them.

> >

> > achavez

> >

> > > > Subject: RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)

> > > > From: Imar Spaanjaars <Imar@S...>

> > > > Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 23:03:34 +0100

> > > > X-Message-Number: 1

> > > >=3D20

> > > > No, this is not true (yet).

> > > > Currently the .NET runtime is required which only runs on Windows

> > > > based

> > > > systems. However, C# has been submitted to ECMA (the organization

> > that

> > > > standardized JavaScript amongst other things) so it may become an

> > open

> > > > language. If that is the case, other companies can start to

> > develop

> > > > runtimes / compilers etc for other platforms as well.

> > > >=3D20

> > > > HtH

> > > >=3D20

> > > > Imar

> > > >=3D20

> > > >=3D20

> > > > At 01:12 PM 1/14/2001 +0000, you wrote:

> > > > >hi there

> > > > >

> > > > >I have heared that C#(C-Sharp) is platform independent like JAVA

> > is

> > > > it true.

> > > > >

> > > > >Thanks

> > > >=3D20

> > > >=3D20

> > > >=3D20

> > > >

> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------

> > > >=3D20

> > > > Subject: RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)

> > > > From: "Douglas Rohm" <dlr@m...>

> > > > Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 16:21:45 -0500

> > > > X-Message-Number: 2

> > > >=3D20

> > > > At this time, it is *not* platform independent.  The structure of

> > .NET

> > > > is

> > > > extremely similar to Java's runtime.  The whole structure of .NET

> > is

> > > > the

> > > > Common Language Runtime (CLR).  If the language is CLR compliant,

> > it

> > > > simply

> > > > means that it is able to compile to the Intermediate Language (IL)

> > for

> > > > the

> > > > CLR.  The CLR at that point functions as the middle layer between

> > the

> > > > .NET

> > > > programs and the operating system.  To make .NET platform

> > independent

> > > > there

> > > > would need to be a CLR for the other platforms.  This has been the

> > > > subject

> > > > of gossip lately.  Will MS create a CLR for the other platforms?

> > Who

> > > > knows.

> > > > They haven't said anything about it.  Then, and only then, would

> > *all*

> > > > the

> > > > ".NET langauges" be cross platform independent.

> > > >=3D20

> > > > Personally, I hope MS does create CLR's for other platforms.  It

> > will

> > > > make

> > > > all of our lives much easier.  Even if third parties make the

> > > > CLR's...all

> > > > the better.     :)

> > > >=3D20

> > > > Douglas Rohm

> > > > dlr@m...

> > > >=3D20

> > > >=3D20

> > > > -----Original Message-----

> > > > From: imtiaz arif [mailto:imtarif@h...]

> > > > Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2001 8:12 AM

> > > > To: C # list

> > > > Subject: RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)

> > > >=3D20

> > > >=3D20

> > > > hi there

> > > >=3D20

> > > > I have heared that C#(C-Sharp) is platform independent like JAVA

> > is it

> > > > true.

> > > >=3D20

> > > > Thanks

> > > >=3D20

> > >

> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------

> >

> > Subject: RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)

> > From: Bri&Liz <brianh@s...>

> > Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 17:31:07 -0500

> > X-Message-Number: 2

> >

> > AChavez,

> >

> > LOL! Good sense of humor. Hey! There is a .NET that you can use. It is

> > a

> > real massive beta dowload/CD. Be careful if you are a VB6 user as an

> > errant

> > double click on a VB file containing a GUI will pop you into Web Forms

> > :o)

> >

> > And C# is a real language as well.

> >

> > Okay *sweeping generalization* C# will be a major hit on Java. Reason?

> > Simple, it is Java only you can link libraries from any other language

> > you

> > have. I think it's better structured than Java as well. Mr. Hejlberg

> > (formerly the doer of all things Delphi) used the best of Java and the

> > best

> > of C/C++. So there are more and better primitives and you can actually

> > do

> > something with strings (beside scratch your head wondering how you do

> > mid()

> > in Java).

> >

> > Good day :o))

> >

> > Brian

> >

Message #10 by "a chavez" <achavez382@w...> on Tue, 30 Jan 2001 22:41:54 -0000
As I feel the crosshairs focusing, I understand that 'managed code is

p-code' is a vast simplification and I don't know enough to say why.  Does

anyone have a simple explanation?



achavez

Message #11 by "Daniel Walker" <danielw@w...> on Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:41:26 -0000
Well, the original question was "Will .NET be deployed on other platforms

from Windows?" The answer to this question, it seems to me, is "Yes". In

the November interview between Anders Hiejlsberg and Richard Hess on MSDN

Show, Heijlsberg describe the .NET framework as a layered architecture,

whose layers could be removed or added, depending on the environment in

which it was being used. During that interview, Hess then suggested a

refrigerator (if my memory serves me right) or a wrist watch, as devices

that would use stripped down versions of .NET. Hiejlsberg agreed that this

was _exactly_ what he was getting at.



So, whatever "platforms" will be developed for wristwatches in the next 25

years, they sure won't be Windows. Doesn't mean Microsoft isn't aiming to

be in the market to make such operating systems, but they won't be

Windows.



Indeed, the future of Windows, in its existing form, with it's hard-wired

GUI and it's PC-orented appraoch, is perhaps questionable. Windows is a

child of the PC age, which now appears to be coming to an end. Users are

finding that they don't need the complexity of a PC, with a PC-grade

operating system, while internet content providers are finding that they

need something more powerful than a beefed-up PC, with a beefed-up PC-grade

operating system, which is what a modern server actually is. In fact, if

you take the PC out of the picture, you can see how the power of

net-enabled devices can suddenly start to expand in both directions: more

power/less power, depending on whether you're delivering or recieving

content.



I found it interesting (last October, was it?) when IBM announced the

launched of their Z-box series: massive super-server mainframes that can

deliver huge amounts of content. At first it seemed an arcaic approach,

by a company that was divorced from the world around it, but when I looked

at the statistics, the literally millions of simultaneous active sessions

these things can handle (despite the fact that they're no bigger than an

old PDP-10) I began to see that, for massive E-commerce or B2B web

applications, or huge web-hosting companies, these things - or something

like them - could be the answer. In any case the expansion in power of the

server, away from a PC-oriented implementation, to something more

powerful, is a logical way to proceed.



The great thing about .NET is that, even if this happens and "mainframe"

computing enjoys a renaicance, there will not be the split between the

high priests who tend the machine and the lackies who use it - as there

was in the days before the PC age. Under the .NET framework, compiled

Intermediate Language executables built for a super-thin handheld

client-type device will be recognisable as executable IL-code... by a

mainframe, by a PC, by any machine with enough layers of the .NET

framework, to run it. This means that, regardless of what .NET-compliant

languae you chose, what platform or device you use to develope your code

on, you will still be able to write executables that could be deployed

straight onto a mainframe, or any other more massive content-providing

server machine.



In many ways, the PC created the static web, of ten years ago; HTML pages

and the odd bit of Javascript. However, it is the dynamic web which has

killed the PC, simply because it is too cumbersome a solution to the

problem. In 25 years time people will no doubt marvle at the thought that

there were these "type-writer" like machines that had big fans in the back

of them, and you had to go over to them and switch them on and sit down at

them in order to pull anything off the internet. And no doubt the archane

world of the "sever farm", with its miles and miles of cabling, it's patch

boxes and UPSs, and its secret language of "load balancing" and

"permissions", will look as much like the stone age, as the world of

mainframe computing, as it was 25 years ago, does today.



Indeed, if we _are_ going to reach the limits of physical processor speed

within the next 25 years, then there may be no ther option that the

silicon age can offer, than to increase the physical power and size of

each individual content provider. It's easy to get wooed by hardware

manufacturers and their grand schemes... but what if quantum computers

don't work, and neural networks prove to be a damp squib?



There's a fly in this ointment, however. If IBM are right, and the correct

way is to go for machines like the Z900, then Microsoft will have to do

something about IBM's current love affair wth Linux. Much of the Z900's

software architecture is Linux-based.



Mainframes? Well, IBM were right about the PC, weren't they: the first

open-architecture, business-oriented microcomputer? In fact, they've got a

knack for developing things like the PC and the SQL language syntax, which

become new standards, whilst managing to make comparatively little out of

them, themselves :). I certainy think servers will benefit from a move

away from the "beefed-up PC" approach... and if they do, then different

operating systems will have to be developed for them. By Microsoft, or

whoever. And let's hope there's room for .NET on those operating systems,

because it is, at last, the true "write it once, run it anywhere"

architecture. Given that fact, the question "will the .NET framework be

deployed on non-Windows platforms" is almost a moot point, isn't it?



These are all the musings of my wandering mind, of course :).



Daniel Walker

Wrox Press



> I apologize if I hurt your feelings, Chris.  I was qustioning your

> generalizations and what I felt was ill-advised direction to the

> _original_ question, not your background or your, uh, name.

> 

> I work for a F500 and a conservative one at that.  I am a Windows

> programmer, corporate programming, not software industry.  I will be using

> .NET when it's done, not before.  Having been a participant in several

> beta programs, "technology previews", I don't recommend it unless you have

> the time for r/d.  Generally, we don't, so we let companies like yours to

> do the sorting out, and associated hemmoraging, and either pay for the

> wisdom or gather it vicariously through publications.

> 

> I will be using c#.  It appears to have the elegant library structure 

> that I admire in Java, an accessible syntax and is produced by a reputable

> tool company.  Spare me the boosterism of how predominant they

> are...market share is  popularity contest, not quality review: they are

> good, not great.  Borland is great and we know where they are.

> 

> But call it what it is.  The CLR is a translator (as Java VM, as UCSD

> Pascal).  Meta-code, managed code, is p-code, as is byte code.  C#'s

> syntax is an evolution of Java, which is an evolution of C.  To mis-quote

> some apple PR toadie, This is evolution not revolution.

> 

> And this is what I will be using, not the marketing.  I won't be slapping

> labels on rewrapped code and calling it cutting edge.  I won't even

> attempt to move our vb6 code into .net using translation recipes:

> maintenance cycle until we rewrite for the new platform.

> 

> Resist the hype.

> 

> ps: no troll here, just brand new to the list.

> 

> Aaron Chavez

> achavez382@w...

> 

> 

> > > and all if not most

> > 

> > 	   >> uh-oh, sweeping generalization approaching...

> > 

> > 	I work for a company whose "herd" are Fortune 500 companies who

> > use predominantly Microsoft Technologies -- all of them, that I am aware

> > of, are both looking forward to and planning for .NET.

> > 

> > 	> software vendors who produce products for the Win

> > 	> environment will be moving to .NET in the near future (when it

> > is

> > 	> available).

> > 	=09

> > 		>>	Aaaack.  This is ridiculous.  There is no .NET

> > beyond 'frameworks'

> > 		>>(whitepapers), paid-for articles warning of instant

> > career obsolescence if

> > 		>>we don't early-adopt (fritepapers), and betas that

> > anyone downloading is

> > 		>>helping to debug.  And don't forget the 'SP3'

> > rule...three service packs

> > 		>>until stability.

> > 

> > 		Is there a point in this somewhere, or are you simply

> > trolling.  Firstly I am in the software industry.  Secondly, My point

> > was that many companies do use Microsoft technologies besides their OS,

> > not to mention all the software written only for Windows ( I know it

> > hurts you to admit that ) and it would be advantageous for other OS

> > producers to produce a compliant CLR and take advantage of the huge base

> > of Windows applications which will be written to the CLR.  The CLR has

> > already been submitted to an international standards body and if

> > approved there is nothing to prevent other OS producers from taking

> > advantage of it.  NET is very real,  OF course you are right achavez,

> > .NET is a "phantom", I should know I have been using the "white papers"

> > to compile programs, create web services, windows services and windows

> > applications since mid last year in my Beta environment.  Unlike some

> > people I and my development team like to be ahead of the game when new

> > technologies are released.  As far as "DEBUGGING",  I also have an

> > opportunity for input into the project by participating in this

> > venture.<<<<waves his 'BE GONE TROLL' wand >>>>

> > 

> > 	> I hope all this happens, SUN has been rather jerky with

> > 	> it's handling of JAVA, a platform independent solution which

> > is a viable

> > 	> alternative would be most welcome.

> > 

> > 		    >>This, I agree with. 

> > 

> > 

> > 		Ah, you agree with something, you are not without hope.

> > 

> > 			>>This will never happen.  There is no money

> > trail

> > 			>>for MS to follow if they adapt their tools to

> > not-in-Redmond OS's and

> > 			>>certainly  none to maintain them.

> > 

> > 

> > 			 If I were you Achavez, I wouldn't write that

> > chapter yet.

> > 

> > 		>>achavez"

> > 

> > 		Gesundheit!  Heheh, couldn't pass it up.  I don't know

> > why but the second I saw your sig I thought of Dilbert in this Sunday's

> > paper.

> > 

> > <<<<CD>>>>

> > 	

> > >  -----Original Message-----

> > > From: 	"C # list digest" <c_sharp@p...>@INFOIMAGE 

> > > Sent:	Tuesday, January 30, 2001 1:01 AM

> > > To:	c_sharp digest recipients

> > > Subject:	c_sharp digest: January 29, 2001

> > >

> > > C_SHARP Digest for Monday, January 29, 2001.

> > >

> > > 1. RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)

> > > 2. RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)

> > >

> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------

> > >

> > > Subject: RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)

> > > From: "a chavez" <achavez382@w...>

> > > Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 19:39:06 -0000

> > > X-Message-Number: 1

> > >

> > > > Window's has a huge software base

> > >

> > >     Yes, very true...

> > >

> > > > and all if not most

> > >

> > >     uh-oh, sweeping generalization approaching...

> > >

> > > > software vendors who produce products for the Win

> > > > environment will be moving to .NET in the near future (when it is

> > > > available).

> > >

> > >     Aaaack.  This is ridiculous.  There is no .NET beyond 'frameworks'

> > > (whitepapers), paid-for articles warning of instant career

> > > obsolescence if

> > > we don't early-adopt (fritepapers), and betas that anyone downloading

> > > is

> > > helping to debug.  And don't forget the 'SP3' rule...three service

> > > packs

> > > until stability.

> > >

> > > > I hope all this happens, SUN has been rather jerky with

> > > > it's handling of JAVA, a platform independent solution which is a

> > > viable

> > > > alternative would be most welcome.

> > >

> > >     This, I agree with.  This will never happen.  There is no money

> > > trail

> > > for MS to follow if they adapt their tools to not-in-Redmond OS's and

> > > certainly  none to maintain them.

> > >

> > > achavez

> > >

> > > > > Subject: RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)

> > > > > From: Imar Spaanjaars <Imar@S...>

> > > > > Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 23:03:34 +0100

> > > > > X-Message-Number: 1

> > > > >=3D20

> > > > > No, this is not true (yet).

> > > > > Currently the .NET runtime is required which only runs on Windows

> > > > > based

> > > > > systems. However, C# has been submitted to ECMA (the organization

> > > that

> > > > > standardized JavaScript amongst other things) so it may become an

> > > open

> > > > > language. If that is the case, other companies can start to

> > > develop

> > > > > runtimes / compilers etc for other platforms as well.

> > > > >=3D20

> > > > > HtH

> > > > >=3D20

> > > > > Imar

> > > > >=3D20

> > > > >=3D20

> > > > > At 01:12 PM 1/14/2001 +0000, you wrote:

> > > > > >hi there

> > > > > >

> > > > > >I have heared that C#(C-Sharp) is platform independent like JAVA

> > > is

> > > > > it true.

> > > > > >

> > > > > >Thanks

> > > > >=3D20

> > > > >=3D20

> > > > >=3D20

> > > > >

> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------

> > > > >=3D20

> > > > > Subject: RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)

> > > > > From: "Douglas Rohm" <dlr@m...>

> > > > > Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2001 16:21:45 -0500

> > > > > X-Message-Number: 2

> > > > >=3D20

> > > > > At this time, it is *not* platform independent.  The structure of

> > > .NET

> > > > > is

> > > > > extremely similar to Java's runtime.  The whole structure of .NET

> > > is

> > > > > the

> > > > > Common Language Runtime (CLR).  If the language is CLR compliant,

> > > it

> > > > > simply

> > > > > means that it is able to compile to the Intermediate Language (IL)

> > > for

> > > > > the

> > > > > CLR.  The CLR at that point functions as the middle layer between

> > > the

> > > > > .NET

> > > > > programs and the operating system.  To make .NET platform

> > > independent

> > > > > there

> > > > > would need to be a CLR for the other platforms.  This has been the

> > > > > subject

> > > > > of gossip lately.  Will MS create a CLR for the other platforms?

> > > Who

> > > > > knows.

> > > > > They haven't said anything about it.  Then, and only then, would

> > > *all*

> > > > > the

> > > > > ".NET langauges" be cross platform independent.

> > > > >=3D20

> > > > > Personally, I hope MS does create CLR's for other platforms.  It

> > > will

> > > > > make

> > > > > all of our lives much easier.  Even if third parties make the

> > > > > CLR's...all

> > > > > the better.     :)

> > > > >=3D20

> > > > > Douglas Rohm

> > > > > dlr@m...

> > > > >=3D20

> > > > >=3D20

> > > > > -----Original Message-----

> > > > > From: imtiaz arif [mailto:imtarif@h...]

> > > > > Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2001 8:12 AM

> > > > > To: C # list

> > > > > Subject: RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)

> > > > >=3D20

> > > > >=3D20

> > > > > hi there

> > > > >=3D20

> > > > > I have heared that C#(C-Sharp) is platform independent like JAVA

> > > is it

> > > > > true.

> > > > >=3D20

> > > > > Thanks

> > > > >=3D20

> > > >

> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------

> > >

> > > Subject: RE: C# vs VB in NET(PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE ?????????)

> > > From: Bri&Liz <brianh@s...>

> > > Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 17:31:07 -0500

> > > X-Message-Number: 2

> > >

> > > AChavez,

> > >

> > > LOL! Good sense of humor. Hey! There is a .NET that you can use. It is

> > > a

> > > real massive beta dowload/CD. Be careful if you are a VB6 user as an

> > > errant

> > > double click on a VB file containing a GUI will pop you into Web Forms

> > > :o)

> > >

> > > And C# is a real language as well.

> > >

> > > Okay *sweeping generalization* C# will be a major hit on Java. Reason?

> > > Simple, it is Java only you can link libraries from any other language

> > > you

> > > have. I think it's better structured than Java as well. Mr. Hejlberg

> > > (formerly the doer of all things Delphi) used the best of Java and the

> > > best

> > > of C/C++. So there are more and better primitives and you can actually

> > > do

> > > something with strings (beside scratch your head wondering how you do

> > > mid()

> > > in Java).

> > >

> > > Good day :o))

> > >

> > > Brian

> > >


  Return to Index