Ok, so C# 3.0 will use .NET 4.0 which will come after .NET 3.0 that was really WinFX but not?

Quote:[

Yeah, that was me being facetious...

Oops is my face red, ok I get the joke:)

Cheers
Chris

Quote:Original post by SticksandStones
Ok, so C# 3.0 will use .NET 4.0 which will come after .NET 3.0 that was really WinFX but not?

Wow, I should get into government if I this good with misinformation [grin]

Actually, I seem to have been wrong there. That was a bad assumption on my part, as Spoonbender pointed out C# 3.0 will apparently (so far anyway) target the current .NET 2.0 CLR, which will of course at that time be in .NET 3.0.

WinFX is .NET 3.0. Most of the underlying stuff is already out as .NET 2.0, but when WinFX is released come Vista, it will be integrated with what we now know as .NET 2.0 and released as .NET 3.0.

Ok, so will .NET 3.0 that is WinFX support the other stuff that .NET 3.0 was supposed to have a few months ago?

Quote:Original post by SticksandStones
Ok, so will .NET 3.0 that is WinFX support the other stuff that .NET 3.0 was supposed to have a few months ago?

I can only suppose.

So here are some questions I have about the .NET platform.

1. Why not include a linker so distributing .NET applications becomes viable?
2. When are we gonna get an officially supported .NET language that doesn't completely ignore all programming language research outside of the Java world? (closures, metaprogramming system, duck typing and/or type inference system, etc.)
3. Can we get some assurance that choosing .NET as a platform will not result in vendor lock-in? Another words, how about contributing code to Mono?

Quote:Original post by CoffeeMug
So here are some questions I have about the .NET platform.

1. Why not include a linker so distributing .NET applications becomes viable?

ClickOnce Application Manifest.

Quote:
2. When are we gonna get an officially supported .NET language that doesn't completely ignore all programming language research outside of the Java world? (closures, metaprogramming system, duck typing and/or type inference system, etc.)

F#.

Quote:
3. Can we get some assurance that choosing .NET as a platform will not result in vendor lock-in? Another words, how about contributing code to Mono?

Rotor.

Anything else?

Quote:Original post by capn_midnight
ClickOnce Application Manifest.

That's an alternative to Sun's WebStart. It doesn't address the problem I mentioned (having the .NET runtime *in the first place*). This makes it completely impractical to deploy .NET applications and a royal pain in the ass to write server applications (one thing is dropping python.exe in the bin directory, another thing is waiting for an hour to install an "update" to the OS). Why can't they just let us link to .NET libraries statically? Furthermore, ClickOnce only runs on IE.

Quote:Original post by capn_midnight
F#.

Dude, I know about F#. It's a research project. It's no more officially supported than IronPython.

Quote:Original post by capn_midnight
Rotor.

Come on, man. If I build my business around .NET and tomorrow Microsoft chooses to obsolete existing Windows version and double the price for the new version, I'm stuck. I may choose to run Windows today because I feel it's a great server OS for the buck, but if they double the price I might wanna move. Whoops, I can't.

I want a commercial version of .NET supported on multiple platforms (no, Win32 and Win64 is not it). I also want assurances that they won't drop support tomorrow. Contributions to other projects would be nice. Their current license doesn't allow that.