So C compatibility is not essential. But having a good FFI certainly helps.
Posted Apr 4, 2013 20:00 UTC (Thu) by khim (subscriber, #9252)
Java has succeeded and so has C#
Rilly? Reality check: Java Applets - failure, Java ME - failure, Android - failure (it's huge success only came after NDK release), Silverlight - failure, Windows Phone - failure (Windows Phone 7.x, that is, Windows Phone 8 returned back to C - we'll see where it'll lead), where is this success?
I'm talking about "next C" which means that either it replaces C as program-development language or it replaces it as OS kernel-level language. AFAIKS Java and C# both failed there. Spectacularly.
Sure, they carved niche for itself, but so did many other languages - from VBA to PHP and Perl, but "next C"? Not even close.
Posted Apr 4, 2013 20:04 UTC (Thu) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523)
>I'm talking about "next C" which means that either it replaces C as program-development language or it replaces it as OS kernel-level language. AFAIKS Java and C# both failed there. Spectacularly.
You don't need to replace C as a language for the kernel (though C# can be used even there - see Singularity OS).
Posted Apr 4, 2013 20:42 UTC (Thu) by khim (subscriber, #9252)
Java succeeded on mobile (Android) and on the server-side.
C# is very successful on Windows both on client and server side.
Again, in the same fashion: some pieces are written in C# but amount of new C++ code does not go down at all and people rarely make conscious decision to switch from C++ to C# (few projects did that - notably Visual Studio itself - but these are rare exceptions, not rule). If anything C# replaced Visual Basic not C++ - and that only happened because Visual Basic was brutally killed (Visual Fred is not Visual Basic).
P.S. Note that I don't argue that Java and/or C# are not popular - of course they are (I don't necessarily think it's good thing, but that's irrelevant), but are they popular as "Glorious Successor to C" or "Glorious Successor to C++"? Of course not! Not even close!
Posted Apr 4, 2013 21:39 UTC (Thu) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523)
A good C++-like language does not NEED to be directly compatible with all braindeadness of C, it just needs to have a good FFI.
>Again, in the same fashion: some pieces are written in C# but amount of new C++ code does not go down at all and people rarely make conscious decision to switch from C++ to C#
And I've seen tons of these switches. People were eager to jump C++ when an acceptable alternative presented itself.
Posted Apr 5, 2013 7:38 UTC (Fri) by khim (subscriber, #9252)
You clearly haven't seen the number of large enterprise projects switching from C++ to Java in 90s and early 2000-s.
Yes, I have seen these failures. What about them? Sure, with well-oiled PR machine you can convince pointy-haired bosses to adopt basically anything and because they can not admit that they goofed up failures are often presented as successes (Elop is undisputed leader here, but he's not the only one). In any case they are mostly about hype: systems written in Cobol, Pascal, dBase and other similar languages are often still used even when bosses think they operate pure Java (or C#) shops.
IOW: if anything "the big switch of enterprise to Java and C#" is nothing but smoke and mirrors. PR achievement at best.
Posted Apr 4, 2013 23:11 UTC (Thu) by HelloWorld (guest, #56129)
(Visual Fred is not Visual Basic)
Posted Apr 8, 2013 7:56 UTC (Mon) by nix (subscriber, #2304)
Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds