| |||||||||||||
And Mono on Linux?And Mono on Linux?Posted May 31, 2012 16:19 UTC (Thu) by cmccabe (guest, #60281)In reply to: And Mono on Linux? by elanthis Parent article: Moonlight sent into twilight (The H)
There are plenty of statically typed, managed languages as good or better than C#. Java, Scala, Vala, and Golang come to mind. These languages have active open source communities, which you can and should join if you feel a burning desire to convert the C and Python-using heathens.
C# itself is just a rehash of Java with a few small improvements and a lot of Windows-specific libraries. The game plan was to make a non-portable version of Java. Microsoft tried to do this with Visual J++, but Sun wouldn't allow it, so they created .NET.
This gets explained every time the topic of C# comes up, but some people just never get it. There's no point in a C# runtime for Linux, because the whole point of C# is non-portability and reliance on Windows-specific libraries.
(Log in to post comments)
And Mono on Linux? Posted May 31, 2012 16:27 UTC (Thu) by raven667 (subscriber, #5198) [Link]
> This gets explained every time the topic of C# comes up, but some people just never get it. There's no point in a C# runtime for Linux, because the whole point of C# is non-portability and reliance on Windows-specific libraries.
Maybe people understand you but just don't agree with you.
And Mono on Linux? Posted May 31, 2012 16:54 UTC (Thu) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link]
Java (and Scala) are tied to Sun/Oracle/OpenJDK JVM. Which has its own strengths and weaknesses.
Vala is something that nobody outside GNOME really use and Golang is not yet used widely.
By now C# is definitely _not_ a rehash of Java. C# 1 was Java with a bit different syntax, C# 2 was a better Java (with real generics) and C# 3 is a vastly better language than Java. Personally, I'd use it for my projects if I had a really good VM for it (no, Mono does not cut it) and a good Linux IDE for it.
And Mono on Linux? Posted May 31, 2012 23:06 UTC (Thu) by bjartur (guest, #67801) [Link]
What about Ada?
It has been successfully used for mission-critical projects in the transport sector (think, most flight control systems and a railway system or two). I don't know how well it works on Windows, but it works.
And Mono on Linux? Posted Jun 1, 2012 0:06 UTC (Fri) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link]
IMO, Ada is a bit braindead. It's mislabeled as a 'safe' and 'reliable' language because a lot of high-profile reliable software is written in it. So it has a lot of stuff that was thought necessary back in 70-s for reliable language (for example, range checking for numeric types) and a great resistance for new features. For example, lambdas and closures are unthinkable in Ada-style code.
However, real reliability in software in Ada is achieved by thorough reviews and testing, not really by any virtues of the language itself.
The state of art for reliable software has moved on - we now have languages with dependent types and typesets, for example.
And Mono on Linux? Posted Jun 1, 2012 5:00 UTC (Fri) by cmccabe (guest, #60281) [Link]
I know I shouldn't get involved in Yet Another Programming Language Flamewar, but come on. Java is too tied to Oracle-- compared to Mono? (Especially given the recent court rulings?) Vala and Golang are not used widely enough on Linux-- compared to Mono? Just add "compared to Mono?" to any one of your statements and it instantly becomes clear how ridiculous they are.
I understand that some people may be more familiar with C# compared to other languages, but that's not a reason for dismissing them outright. There literally are open source programming languages for every taste, from the most lax old-school Perl coder to the most fastidious functional programmer. Let's try to light a candle rather than curse the darkness.
|
|||||||||||||