Re: Regarding Dot NET
cklester wrote:
>
> Vincent wrote:
> >
> > ...there is no future with Euphoria on Microsoft Windows. The
> > next version of Windows: Windows Vista, has a completely new development
> > platform based
> > on .NET (WinFX), while the Win32 API will still be supported (Win16 not
> > supported),
> > people will quickly see the advantages using WinFX and stop using the Win32
> > coding
> > base. By 2008, Microsoft expects that all development revolving around
> > Windows will
> > be .NET based, and may remove Win32.
>
> I don't know much about dotNET. Doesn't really concern me much, yet. I don't
> see how it's going to be a radical department from the current paradigm. But
> I see that Ruby has a "bridge" for it, and looking at the code sample, I won-
> der really how difficult it will be to bring Euphoria into the .Net platform.
>
> <a
> href="http://www.saltypickle.com/rubydotnet/">http://www.saltypickle.com/rubydotnet/</a>
>
Well if your a Linux user then .NET probably wont effect you much yet.
I guess it would be pretty difficult because Euphoria isn't even
object-oriented, where as Ruby is completely object-oriented!! I do however find
that interesting, since I asked Mario if Ruby were to have a place in the .NET
world, and he said "probably not". I'll have to look at that bridge more
carefully, perhaps I may actually check out Ruby.
> Please note the paragraph above is completely justified. :)
Congradualations!
>
> > Windows won't be so inferior to Linux anymore.
>
> That's a good one, V!!! <wiping tears>
>
Well ofcourse you would disagree if your anti-microsoft. But the fact is
Microsoft is working hard to greatly improve security, and realibilty of their
future OSes. It may not turn out as quite as strong as some Linux or BSD distros,
but it sure is a huge welcome to Windows users. It is also important to point out
that the biggest reason Windows has these problems is become it is by far the
most widely used operating system. I'm sure there would be many more problems if
all this malicious software was targeted on Linux and BSD systems.
> > That will prevent Linux or BSD from ever dominating the desktop domain.
>
> I think (and hope) that Vista is too little too late. M$ does have a hold
> on the personal desktop, but with more and more corporations switching to
> Linux/BSD, I think that marketshare will erode over the course of the next
> 10-20 years. That's good news for the generation below me. :)
That may be true currently, but once Vista is released at the end of 2006, I
suspect that outlook will change. But currently the fact alone that 95% of new
computers come with Windows pre-installed, and the fact that I cant go to just
any computer retail store, and purchase Linux is a poor indication of your point.
Stores dont want to sell software that you can legally get for free elsewhere.
10 to 20 years from now, Windows will probably be a completley different entity,
not even called Windows. Vista may be a little too late, but Microsoft will spend
billions of dollars in marketing to get back in the game. Microsoft has huge
amount of power because because of its money. Billions of dollars is little more
than ice-cream money to Microsoft.
Microsoft has had a long history of falling behind and then catching up. In the
end the one with the most money always wins.
>
> > There could be an Euphoria.NET, but it would have to become a full object
> > oriented
> > language.
>
> Can you tell me why or point me to relevant articles?
Well there could be an Euphoria to MSIL translator, but since the language isnt
even OO, having the programmer handle .NET namespaces, classes, objects, etc.
would be a big problem now wouldnt it. Anything is possible, but if it was done
it would be an awful hack that everyone would want to avoid.
>
> > I probably would still prefer C# over Euphoria.NET anyway, because of the
> > support for pointers and structures.
>
> Is it because I come from a non-pointered, non-structures programming language
> background that I don't find the lack of these to be issues?
Try VB.NET, unsafe code isnt possible in that language. You cannot use pointers,
or any advanced memory handling. Operator overloading, and generics are new for
version 2005. Most programmers like the terse syntax, and pointers of the C
derivents. It makes them feel better about themselves, as if they were smarter.
C# is a much more popular language than VB.NET and infact its alarming Microsoft.
>
> -=ck
> "Programming in a state of EUPHORIA."
> <a
> href="http://www.cklester.com/euphoria/">http://www.cklester.com/euphoria/</a>
>
Regards,
Vincent
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
