Microsoft Losing Interest in C#?

[Michael Adams]

I don't know if you have noticed, but it seems like Microsoft is losing
interest in C#, and putting their energy into Visual Basic.NET instead.

For instance, online chats by language since July 1, 2004:

VB.NET 47
C# 6
C++ 8
J# 0

ADO with VB.NET 6
ADO with C# 0
ADO with C++ 0
ADO with J# 0

Windows Forms with VB.NET 2
Windows Forms with C# 0
Windows Forms with C++ 0
Windows Forms with J# 0

If you look at the roadmap Microsoft has laid out for Visual Studio 2005 and
the various languages, it appears almost all of the RAD improvements are for
VB.NET. The only thing I see coming for C# are a few language enhancements,
but really nothing for RAD. Yes, C# programmers want granularity, but we
don't get paid unless the projects go out, too! You have to get it out the
door. When is Microsoft going to wake up to this?

I don't understand why Microsoft doesn't put the same kind of energy into
the languages that start with a "C" as they do a "B"...and then they wonder
why people defect to Java, PHP, or even C++ on other platforms.

Maybe it's time for C# people to speak up.

Michael

[Mike Schilling]

"Daniel O'Connell [C# MVP]" <[e-mail]> wrote in
message news:uf******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP15.phx.gbl...

"Mike Schilling" <ms************ *@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Oy******** *****@TK2MSFTNG P11.phx.gbl...

"Daniel O'Connell [C# MVP]" <[e-mail]> wrote in
message news:Oe******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP11.phx.gbl...

It might not be terribly hard, I'm just more concerned with the
possiblity that both choices will be wrong in some cases, can that
semantic information express all possibliities or only a most common
scenario? Can the analyzer determine which possibility is in use? If
not, chances are you are going to get hidden, subtle bugs that upset
someone. It just may not happen to be either of us, ;).
I think that it's well-defined for a given method that a parameter is an
input, an output, or both.

It is, however, in a circumstance where its both, at times only input or
only output matters to the caller, the other result is simply unimportant
for whatever reason(usually because an API does too much, I suspect output
is ingnored more often than the input). How do you determine that with a
code analyzer?

By looking at the API definition. Really. If you can find an exmple where
it's unclear whether an array parameter is input, output, or inout, I'd be
very interested in seeing it.

Actually, copying byte arays is a bad idea. In the array, the byte is
simply an octet; it makes no difference whether it's signed or
unsigned. It isn't until the byte comes out of the array that it
matters, and then it can be cast to sbyte before any arithmetic gets
done on it.
I tend to agree, I think array covariance of primative types(or atleast
signed\unsigned alternatives of one type) is something worht having in
the langauge. But that goes well beyond the JLCA, it is stuck using what
it can. I suppose it could convert to a byte array, but that wouldn't be
very literal and may upset people as well, ;).

Only if they're very literal-minded:-) Seriously, converting to a byte
array rather than an sbyte array doesn't cause any problems, and avoids
any need to copy them.

Unless, for some reason, mathematics is involved.

Never true of byte arrays. True of individual bytes in well-defined
circumstances, e.g when the bytes is used in an arithmetic expression or
converted to a wider type. Casts take care of these.

There's a reason I'm stating these things authoritatively . And it's
possible to do a much better job than the JLCA.

[Daniel O'Connell [C# MVP]]

"Mike Schilling" <ms************ *@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%2******** ********@TK2MSF TNGP15.phx.gbl. ..

"Daniel O'Connell [C# MVP]" <[e-mail]> wrote in
message news:uf******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP15.phx.gbl...

"Mike Schilling" <ms************ *@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Oy******** *****@TK2MSFTNG P11.phx.gbl...

"Daniel O'Connell [C# MVP]" <[e-mail]> wrote in
message news:Oe******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP11.phx.gbl...
It might not be terribly hard, I'm just more concerned with the
possiblity that both choices will be wrong in some cases, can that
semantic information express all possibliities or only a most common
scenario? Can the analyzer determine which possibility is in use? If
not, chances are you are going to get hidden, subtle bugs that upset
someone. It just may not happen to be either of us, ;).

I think that it's well-defined for a given method that a parameter is an
input, an output, or both.
It is, however, in a circumstance where its both, at times only input or
only output matters to the caller, the other result is simply unimportant
for whatever reason(usually because an API does too much, I suspect
output is ingnored more often than the input). How do you determine that
with a code analyzer?

By looking at the API definition. Really. If you can find an exmple
where it's unclear whether an array parameter is input, output, or inout,
I'd be very interested in seeing it.

Knowing if its in, out, or inout is one thing, but knowing if the code
actually cares about the out is quite another. Perhaps the first call to
nextBytes is simply a primer, to throw away the first result set, or
whatever.

By looking at the code, we can know otherwise, but the answer isn't *as*
obvious to an analyzer.

And, of course, you get designers who think its clever to use a bool that
defines if the method puts out output or not, etc.

I'm not saying its not possible, just too much to expect of this particular
product. As you've pointed out, its not really meant for people maintaining
both branches.

> Actually, copying byte arays is a bad idea. In the array, the byte is
> simply an octet; it makes no difference whether it's signed or
> unsigned. It isn't until the byte comes out of the array that it
> matters, and then it can be cast to sbyte before any arithmetic gets
> done on it.
>

I tend to agree, I think array covariance of primative types(or atleast
signed\unsigned alternatives of one type) is something worht having in
the langauge. But that goes well beyond the JLCA, it is stuck using
what it can. I suppose it could convert to a byte array, but that
wouldn't be very literal and may upset people as well, ;).

Only if they're very literal-minded:-) Seriously, converting to a byte
array rather than an sbyte array doesn't cause any problems, and avoids
any need to copy them.

Unless, for some reason, mathematics is involved.

Never true of byte arrays. True of individual bytes in well-defined
circumstances, e.g when the bytes is used in an arithmetic expression or
converted to a wider type. Casts take care of these.

You've got a point. I was thinking of matrix transformations , but in
retrospect, either there would be a standard transform and the converter
could fix the outputted code so that it behaves properly or the matrix
method would be ported by the JLCA anyway, thus no need for an array
conversion.
There's a reason I'm stating these things authoritatively . And it's
possible to do a much better job than the JLCA.

Its always possible, yes, almost anything is possible if you are willing to
put the time into. The question is more: Is it worth it? One would hope so,
but I certainly don't have a vote on the product itself.

[Mike Schilling]

"Daniel O'Connell [C# MVP]" <[e-mail]> wrote in
message news:uR******** *****@TK2MSFTNG P11.phx.gbl...

It is, however, in a circumstance where its both, at times only input or
only output matters to the caller, the other result is simply
unimportant for whatever reason(usually because an API does too much, I
suspect output is ingnored more often than the input). How do you
determine that with a code analyzer?

By looking at the API definition. Really. If you can find an exmple
where it's unclear whether an array parameter is input, output, or inout,
I'd be very interested in seeing it.

Knowing if its in, out, or inout is one thing, but knowing if the code
actually cares about the out is quite another. Perhaps the first call to
nextBytes is simply a primer, to throw away the first result set, or
whatever.

By looking at the code, we can know otherwise, but the answer isn't *as*
obvious to an analyzer.

And, of course, you get designers who think its clever to use a bool that
defines if the method puts out output or not, etc.

I'm not saying its not possible, just too much to expect of this
particular product. As you've pointed out, its not really meant for people
maintaining both branches.

My last comment, I think, since we've pretty much beaten this subject to
death:

Between performance and correctness, I'd choose correctness every time.
It's much eaiser, given an application that works, to find and fix
bottlenecks, than, given a program with randomly introduced bugs, to find
all of them.

[Daniel O'Connell [C# MVP]]

"Mike Schilling" <ms************ *@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:eu******** ******@TK2MSFTN GP15.phx.gbl...

"Daniel O'Connell [C# MVP]" <[e-mail]> wrote in
message news:uR******** *****@TK2MSFTNG P11.phx.gbl...

It is, however, in a circumstance where its both, at times only input
or only output matters to the caller, the other result is simply
unimportant for whatever reason(usually because an API does too much, I
suspect output is ingnored more often than the input). How do you
determine that with a code analyzer?

By looking at the API definition. Really. If you can find an exmple
where it's unclear whether an array parameter is input, output, or
inout, I'd be very interested in seeing it.

Knowing if its in, out, or inout is one thing, but knowing if the code
actually cares about the out is quite another. Perhaps the first call to
nextBytes is simply a primer, to throw away the first result set, or
whatever.

By looking at the code, we can know otherwise, but the answer isn't *as*
obvious to an analyzer.

And, of course, you get designers who think its clever to use a bool that
defines if the method puts out output or not, etc.

I'm not saying its not possible, just too much to expect of this
particular product. As you've pointed out, its not really meant for
people maintaining both branches.

My last comment, I think, since we've pretty much beaten this subject to
death:

Agreed
Between performance and correctness, I'd choose correctness every time.
It's much eaiser, given an application that works, to find and fix
bottlenecks, than, given a program with randomly introduced bugs, to find
all of them.
However, on the same page, I wouldn't trust the application in any
circumstance. After a port like that, you really *need* to analyze eveyr
line, run every unit test, or there may be other, subtle bugs.

Correctness just isn't something definatly attainable, even if the tool, in
theory, should be perfect.

[John Bailo]

Michael Adams wrote:

I don't know if you have noticed, but it seems like Microsoft is losing
interest in C#, and putting their energy into Visual Basic.NET instead.

Maybe it's time for C# people to speak up.

Michael

If anything, they seem to be sliding back towards VC++ and COM.

I think they couldn't crack the java market, so they will retreat and
concentrate on hard coded ( rather than soft coded ) applications.

--
http://www.texeme.com

[Saras Asnani]

> why do yhou make grammatical mistakes ? "a well programmed monkey could

do *its* not their job". Syntax and grammar mean almost the same thing,
you know. If you make English grammatical mistakes, do you also make
syntactical mistakes ? It is worth correcting, you know.
Listen Mr thankless, South Indian. Just because South Indians are
stealing our US JOBS does not mean crap about my grammar! Second,
just because Idians without open minds can talk about grammar and
their high literacy rate does equate to activity of the mind/brain
proudcing good output (even if the output was themsevles)... So f****k
off with the grammar stuff. let me tell you, it will take a long time
for you to understand America and the New Found Lands/Thought (We
have some problems) but we are okay. We values ideas not just good
f***ken grammar. So, be happy mofo, that Columbus never found the
real India.... just look what we did to natives of America. All I am
saying is the idea/soultion/questions matter... If you are concerned
about spelling and grammar... go watch spellbound, you bribed &
converted corrupt mofo!
....yeah.. and peace out :)
.......If you are not from the likes of woziack, jobs, or the xerox
palo-alto your reaction is not wanted here!
Ravichandran J.V. <jv************ @yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<uK******* *******@tk2msft ngp13.phx.gbl>. .. <!-- really like C# but I wish like good sportsmen I wish MicroTheft was
a good sport and say in their C# Language Release something to the
effect "C# exists because it has stood on the shoulder of Giants..."
-->

Sportsmen play sports and software engineers engineer programs. So, why
have this cross-platform integration?
<!-- Thanks for lending me your mind. -->

When one reads a post here one has no option but to spend some of the
grey matter on the contents as I have done. I am sure, though, that I
have not lent my mind so, please don't use my mind.

<!--
Ofcourse this does not apply to people who are forced by their managers
or senior managers to use a technology/language like VB.NET or VB. It is
these managers who need job security (their business and tech or other
knowledge amounts zero... a well programmed monkey could
do their job.. just like G.W. Bush). -->

why do yhou make grammatical mistakes ? "a well programmed monkey could
do *its* not their job". Syntax and grammar mean almost the same thing,
you know. If you make English grammatical mistakes, do you also make
syntactical mistakes ? It is worth correcting, you know.
with regards,
J.V.Ravichandra n
- http://www.geocities.com/
jvravichandran
- http://www.411asp.net/func/search?
qry=Ravichandra n+J.V.&cob=aspn etpro
- http://www.southasianoutlook.com
- http://www.MSDNAA.Net
- http://www.csharphelp.com
- http://www.poetry.com/Publications/
display.asp?ID= P3966388&BN=999 &PN=2
- Or, just search on "J.V.Ravichandr an"
at http://www.Google.com

*** Sent via Developersdex http://www.developersdex.com ***
Don't just participate in USENET...get rewarded for it!

[Saras Asnani]

John, I agree. Even if my fist love SUN, Inc goes down the drain,
you will still have one of my favs like IBM to take care of the Java
Ball.

I have to say Write Once Run Anywhere + J2EE + better security are the
most appealing reasons for Java.

I wish Java performed well on the front end (without have to know the
exact details or spending hours on optimizing the code... if this was
true I would still just use C++/MSVC++)

The other thing I wish that there was an IDE for Java for front end
general windows (wins for apple, unix x, ms-win etc..) and for web
page development.

I have used Jbuilder, and (ucky!) Sybase's PowerJ.
Ofcourse when I first say C# and still do now, I belive C# is nice
copy of Java with additions. But you have to give MS the compliments
on creating a very nice IDE (Visual Studio). The down side to IDEs is
that non-technology or people without a good understading of
engieering (both hardware/software) when they come out with a
solution, there is no thought... it just wirte code, test-debug in
many cycles, then as the year goes by.... they say this was the right
way of doing it.

For me the bigger problem is that most of the people do not have
software engineering concepts. or lets say common sense. Think
before you code. Architect + Civil Engieer for building instead of
okay boys dig the hole, pour the cement, build the building with
rainbow color bricks.... oh yeah whats the problem.... It works it
stands... till one day Hurrican Jeane comes along and the building
falls.....
Its like IRAQ. They have WMDS.. Sure they are hidding it up their
butts. They dont have any, so get sadam. No thought.
Its the Act first, think later what distingues between a MS oriented
solutions provider and a more open-minded, effective, & efficent
solutions provider.
I think Bush, Chenney, Gates, and BALL...AMMER were programmed by the
same people... Or it was Gates you did BALL and BALL in turn Did Bush,
and Bush did Dick... so its pretty f'ed up...
John Bailo <ja*****@earthl ink.net> wrote in message news:<2r******* ******@uni-berlin.de>...

Michael Adams wrote:

I don't know if you have noticed, but it seems like Microsoft is losing
interest in C#, and putting their energy into Visual Basic.NET instead.

Maybe it's time for C# people to speak up.

Michael

If anything, they seem to be sliding back towards VC++ and COM.

I think they couldn't crack the java market, so they will retreat and
concentrate on hard coded ( rather than soft coded ) applications.