C#/.NET (Vague Troll)
Something that bugs me about people who come from an MS development background is that they seem incapable of admitting the influence of Java on both C# and .NET - C# is always "the ancestor of C and C++" (i.e. not Java); no one talks about the similarities between the CLR and the JVM (like *both* of them support multiple languages).
Walter, I come from a Microsoft development background and instantly recognised that .Net was a new version of Java. In fact all the developers I know saw this.
My first exposure to C# code was a quick glance over some code in a magazine opened at random. At first I thought I was looking at Java code. I was astounded by how similar C# was to Java.
I too have a hard time distinguishing between the reek of one vs. the other. ;-)
I always assumed C# was originally based on Microsoft's Java clone after reading this old JOS article:
It's obvious, isn't it.
Steve Jones (UK)
It's not a big deal - it's just vaguely frustrating - like when Win95 came out and people were oohing and ahing about stuff I could do on my Amiga TEN years earlier! Grrrrr!
"Many features of C# were designed in response to the strengths and weaknesses of other languages, particularly Java and C++."
To me, C# is what Java should have been.
Everything is connected to everything else, those that succeed make new connections that are immediately recognised as always being there.
I think it unlikely that anyone has ever claimed C# to be the ancestor of C and C++, nor, for that matter, that Java is the ancestor of C and C++.
el, who fortunately remains descendant from his parents
I have to agree w/ prior replies . . . most .NET developers I'm aware of stick to the following comments/admissions:
I completely agree that this is hardly ever acknowledged, although it goes both ways as well. C#/.NET gave us a number of "totally new and innovative" language/platform features that java had for years, but then java 1.5 adds a bunch of equally new and innovative features like arbitrary class metadata and autoboxing. I haven't seen either side acknowledge the other, but the influences in both directions are obvious.
Perhaps Walter's point is that while people _talk_ about it, you're never likely to see a _book_ on C# that talks about how it's a descendent (or rip-off, or whatever) of Java. Presumably there are political reasons for this.
I'd say .NET is an evolution of COM+, and C# is an evolution of Java.
Just me (Sir to you)
C# is obviously similar to java, but in many of the areas where it is different it has taken ideas from Dephi:
IMO, it isn't the structs or the fact that they have delegates or that all methods start capitolized that makes C# superior to java, its the folowing reasons:
"different it has taken ideas from Dephi"
I hope there's something more to Java than it's inspiration of C#. If that's all there is, then it's to the glue factory for that bad boy...
30 year old...
Fog Creek Home