I saw a magazine in Comp USA yesterday, and the cover said "C# vs C++" I read the article inside and it said that C# code is simpler and you need less code to do the same things, and that C# is going to replace C++. Anybody know anything about this? I like games where I kill people!!!!!! }:-)

C# is highly unportable. Many developers wrtie code for a variety of operating systems. They are wrong.

-----------------------------

A wise man once said "A person with half a clue is more dangerous than a person with or without one."

Don''t believe the hype!

And that''s really all C# is, right now... yeah, they have a rough syntax laid out already, and it''s SUPPOSED to make coding easier... but you wanna know how? they''re going to generalize the syntax, then create a higher-level language than C++... this way, you can write in the generalized syntax (accomplishing basically the same things, but WAAAAAY slower), or you can write in the "lower" language like C++ (or one of the others that are supported) and what''ll happen is C# will "interpret" it into C# calls... moving up (to a higher level language) is a BAD THING. A couple of things to think about:

First, definitely don''t listen to anything that says C# will replace C++... that''s like saying several years ago that C++ was going to replace C... same motive behind it, too... but we all realistically know it''s not gonna happen... People still use C, and for good reason, too... Just because something is an extension of a language, and it''s got added features, doesn''t make it better, nor does it render the lower level language useless.

Second, C# is supposed to be the driving force behind .Net, whose concept hasn''t even hit alpha stage yet... I smell vaporware... ''nuff said there.

Third, look at the specification for C#, if you''re really curious... it''s posted on microsoft.com somewhere, shouldn''t be hard to find (I haven''t looked at it since it was first released). It looks an awful like Java, huh?... almost an exact copy, except they let you have low level pointer access in some cases (baaad idea for something intended for more than one platform), and of course the extra M$ fudge added in for good measure. Seems to me that Microsoft got mad that they couldn''t take over Java, and went home to "play with its own toys".

Furthermore, C# seems to be very closely tied to .Net, so closely tied that any other platform company (in their right mind) will not support C# unless they really want to support .Net. I don''t see that happening, really. Microsoft realizes this... so what do they do? They go to the media and psych all the people there up about .Net, and then bombshell them with not just a new language, but an actual specification for it! The media, most of whom are not programmers, go wild over the notion. They think it''s the greatest thing since coffee on the computer... err, Java, I mean... so they print up heaps of propoganda for it. Microsoft is happy, because they know enough people are going to blindly learn the language thinking it''s the Next Best Thing. Most of those people won''t see the error in their ways until either .Net really does turn out to be vaporware, or until they look next door and see another company churning out servlets and CGI scripts that have both a) a larger audience and b) quicker execution time.

One more thing... in all my experiences with Microsoft, they''ve always come out with a $hi++y product first, then gradually made it better as more and more people complained. Don''t get me wrong, they''re pretty good at this. Look at windows (don''t look at win 1.0-3.0...) or look at DirectX (those first couple of attempts were gawd-awful, but they eventually got it right) or even winNT (they picked up a little quicker on that one, but the first couple were still pretty bad)... I expect the same with .Net, if it is ever actually (miraculously) realized. You won''t see me coding for that "platform" (what can you call something like that?) until Microsoft gets it right.

--------------------------------------------------------------
C quad-plus? ... nah

C += 2? ... no way

C <<1 ... nope, most people won''t get it

C ++ ... yeah! but we''ll call it C#
++

(and not C-hash, or C-pound... it''s C-sharp... a half step up, musically, and the ugliest key in the entire set of scales (most sharps in a key you can have)

Ach, MS hasnt gotten any product right yet. Their better than before, but not right. :/

-----------------------------

A wise man once said "A person with half a clue is more dangerous than a person with or without one."

Actually I''ve got a sneaking suspicion it''s kindof the next generation of Visual Basic, with the motto "lets try to please everyone at once and fail miserably.".


Oh well, we''ll see when it comes out.
I doubt I''ll use it, it has no generic programming ( templates ).


Give me one more medicated peaceful moment.
~ (V)^|) |<é!t|-| ~
ERROR: Your beta-version of Life1.0 has expired. Please upgrade to the full version. All important social functions will be disabled from now on.