Was C# a mistake? And if so, in what way?
>>51887809
C# is deprecated. Use F# or Swift depending on platform.
>crossplatform compatibility meme
Thats what happened. Beginners and intermediates shouldn't focus on that aspect of programming and should instead focus on whatever is most efficient for your time.
>>51887809
nah it's still better than java, though you'll be supporting the hitler of our era, microsoft
>>51887879
>>crossplatform compatibility meme
But what about Mono?
C# seems to only be getting better and better with how they're making .net opensource daily and fixing bugs for Mono making it compatible for le OSX and Lenoox.
Might get flamed for this, but from my "experience" in programming in C#, it's basically like Java built for Windows computer.
Was able to make a small GUI program without much knowledge in C#.
>>51887942
Mono is late game development.
>>51887975
>Might get flamed for this,
For what? C# is great, syntax is a lot more concise and understandable, .NET framework is massive, a lot easier to use overall, LINQ, tons of other great stuff.
>>51887975
C# is basically what a Native Java code should be optimized as. Its Java improved/streamlined for windows.
>>51888012
For comparing Java to C#.
>>51888036
Definitely.
>>51888036
C# is what C++ would have been if it was modernized.
>>51887942
doesn't work well. Especially on arm.
>>51888178
Would you go so far as to say that it's like C++++?
>>51888486
hurr muh microsoft joke.
Yes, this is the folk-story behind why it was called C#.
Over the past years I've always been reading shit like c# goes open source or gets ported and shit like that... could someone tell me what the fuck is going on? Will it be officially cross platform one day?
>>51888878
>Will it be officially cross platform one day?
hell no, that's one of the main reasons java sucks so hard
though mono works pretty well from what i've heard
>>51888878
Mono is pretty close to cross-platform, AND it's only getting better lately. In a year or so I would expect it to drastically improve.
Also who the fuck cares about cross-platform? Doesn't even matter all that much for most users I'd imagine
>>51889052
I don't give a fuck about linux but I'd be great if my programs would also be usable on macs.. but if I use mono, can I still visual studio?
>>51889081
http://www.mono-project.com/docs/getting-started/install/mac/
>>51887809
>And if so, in what way?
static main.
>>51889233
wrong language friendo
>>51889292
What? C# requires a static main function.
Why? Because it's super-OOP! But it's exactly equivalent to a global main function, and you end up instantiating your class and calling your real main anyway, so what's the point again? Super-OOP, that's the point!
>>51889388
Better than the clusterfuck known as C++ syntax.
Enjoy your buffer overflows and unsafe code tho
>>51889432
>Better than the clusterfuck known as C++ syntax.
What does C++ have to do with the entirely arbitrary requirement that main be a static member of a class?
As far as I can tell, the one and only reason it was done is because Java did it. And the one and only reason Java did it is because of "Super-OOP!"
>>51888878
C# is an open standard, I believe and has been for a long time. But that means nothing. What really counts is the CLR. Microsoft only creates a CLR for Windows and for every other platform, you'll have to rely on something else like Mono.
It goes without saying that the Microsoft CLR is the most complete, error-free, and compatible of the bunch.
>>51889468
>What does C++ have to do with the entirely arbitrary requirement that main be a static member of a class?
Why do you even care? That's such a petty thing to be obsessing about... It doesn't affect the language or the usability of it in anyway.
>>51889894
>Why do you even care? That's such a petty thing to be obsessing about... It doesn't affect the language or the usability of it in anyway.
Because it's one of the most WTF things in the language, and it's *the very first thing you run into*.
>>51889930
Pretty silly to be so focused on desu. Think about the rest of C# and .net and how convenient it is and how much easier it makes things.
It really isn't anywhere near as bad as people seem to have pre-concieved notions about.
>>51889953
>Pretty silly to be so focused on desu.
Who says I'm focused on it?
It's an obvious fucking mistake. It's completely contrived, and every argument for it is circular.
>It really isn't anywhere near as bad as people seem to have pre-concieved notions about.
If you're talking about C# in general, then I have no idea what you're talking about, since absolutely everyone gushes about it non-stop. The only people negative about it are kernel-compiling C weirdos, "muh freedom" weirdos, and angry Java people.
>>51890029
>If you're talking about C# in general, then I have no idea what you're talking about, since absolutely everyone gushes about it non-stop.
Actually a lot of people still hate on .net even though they have no idea why they hate it really other than reading it or somewhere or just deciding "lol it makes things easier so it sucks".
I don't get it. Do you like C# or not?
Can C# ever be truly obfuscated?
>>51890070
>I don't get it. Do you like C# or not?
Forcing main into a class as a static function is fucknig retarded.
>>51887809
Just claiming exposure to C# gets you calls from recruiters saying an employer might be interested in you, so I really have no complaints about it. You do want to move out of mom and dad's basement some day, don't you?
>>51889388
1. C# can have multiple entry points. Pick which you need in the project settings.
2. It's static because the class it's defined in is NOT instantiated at launch. Simple as that.
>>51891026
Can C# ever be obfuscated?
Or is it pretty much always vulnerable?
>>51891066
Dotfuscator is a built-in tool of VS.
>>51888178
There is visual c++ which adds c# features to c++.
>>51891084
Yes but obfuscators don't completely prevent reverse-engineering.
>>51891112
It doesn't. Even C++/CX doesn't.
>>51891147
You explicitly asked about obfuscation.
>>51891166
Is C# the masterrace language?
>>51891218
Check out Nemerle. But if you count only "enterprise" languages, it is.
>>51891026
>1. C# can have multiple entry points. Pick which you need in the project settings.
Unless you can show me some other option, I think you're just talking about selecting which class's main function to call. That is *not* what I'm talking about.
>2. It's static because the class it's defined in is NOT instantiated at launch. Simple as that.
I understand why it's static. My point is that it is EXACTLY EQUIVALENT to a global main function. It's completely pointless to mandate that it be a member of a class.
>>51891278
C# doesn't have global functions. It's a design reason, really.
>>51891298
>C# doesn't have global functions. It's a design reason, really.
It's an arbitrary reason.
Also, main is *very obviously* a unique case. Again, there is NO REASON why there couldn't be a global main. Putting it inside a class is just arbitrary and stupid. All that happens is that you instantiate your class, then call myclass.realmain().
Was C# a mistake?
yes
And if so, in what way?
microsoft
>>51891314
It's not. The class containing main is not getting instantiated. That's the whole point of static functions.
>>51891371
>It's not. The class containing main is not getting instantiated. That's the whole point of static functions.
*Sigh* you don't get it.
Just take this as a given: I deeply, thoroughly understand the concept of static member functions and why main is a static member.
It's the FORCING IT TO BE A MEMBER IN THE FIRST PLACE that I take issue with.
Surely, the first thing you're going to do is instantiate your class and hand off control to it, yes? Otherwise, it's EVEN DUMBER to force main to be a member.
>>51891460
C# doesn't have global functions AT ALL. BY DESIGN. Why the fuck would they make an exception for main?
>>51891500
>Why the fuck would they make an exception for main?
Because it's dumb to force main, the magical entry-point, to be inside a class, since it's a static function anyway. You break tradition, you gain absolutely nothing, and you made things weirder.
It's really, really easy: main is the one and only global function. The single entry-point. Period. Done.
>>51891560
(Alternatively, they should have made main a regular member function and instantiated the primary class.)
>>51891560
You sacrifice ability to have multiple mains and add syntax bloat for some arbitrary autism reason, basically.
>>51891573
That's even more retarded as it introduces code executed before main.
>>51891588
>You sacrifice ability to have multiple mains
Oh no!
>add syntax bloat for some arbitrary autism reason, basically.
Yeah, syntax bloat. Sure, for declaring a single function with a specific, exact signature. Boo fucking hoo.
As opposed to the completely arbitrary autism reasoning of, "hey! Now it's all OOPy like cray cray! And we can even have *multiple mains*!"
>>51891596
>That's even more retarded as it introduces code executed before main.
I don't think you understand how executables work. Much less executables that are actually hosted in a VM.
>>51891614
Yes, everything is an object there. What fucking kind of an object is a global function? Completely unnecessary.
>>51891646
Completely arbitrary.
And people are calling me autistic. "B-b-but this way everything is an object! It's so exact and pure!"
>>51891680
>"It's so exact and pure!"
Exactly. If you like being a whiny bitch check out Nemerle. It supports BOTH ways. You can even enable Python-like indents.
>Mfw this autist has been in here for 3 hours posting about A STATIC MAIN FUNCTION
Dude do you have a life... or a job?
in what way is a language cross platform? I used to hear all the time learn c++ if you want to be a windows programmer for example but it's entirely possible to write c++ code and compile it on Linux for instance
>>51891733
It's my job, man.
>>51891733
>implying that I'm not doing other things
/g/'s over-reliance on the whole "ur autistic!" and "no life" approach is getting tiresome. Also, it's incredibly ironic.
>>51891742
>in what way is a language cross platform?
Not many, to be honest. So much of making useful software is about libraries that simply having a "cross platform" language is basically meaningless.
You can compile C++ code for Linux. But you can't compile Windows-oriented straight Win32, MFC, ATL, or WTL code for Linux.
If you only need to do things that are supported by, say, the C standard library, then you're fine. Writing some nifty algorithm that reads data from a file, processes it, and spits it out to a new file? No problem. Writing a desktop application with a GUI that needs to behave like other native applications? You're in for a much harder time.
>>51891751
I've just never seen anyone obsess THIS MUCH over a very minor feature of a programming language.
Do you really value your time so little that you're willing to spend at least 30 minutes total typing out posts about it?
Who cares... Is it really upsetting your autism that much?
Cross-Plattform C# is literally meme-tier bad.
Tooling is worse than java, the whole IDE selection consists of iTunes Xamarin and a JavaScript-based text editor that is still in an alpha stage. The package manager NuGet doesn't even work properly cause the packagers don't care about non-Windows.
Library selection and ecosystem is worse than java and Mono is an ugly dependency that is always outdated and never preinstalled, which will make anyone think twice of installing your tools. Java basically runs the game when its about managed code on Unix, cause most apache and enterprise tools already use it and its probably present anyways. The only people that ever used Mono for anything productive were the Gnome guys with their banshee media player
Everything performs worse in general, you are lucky if there is a library for your task at all you can't be picky of performance. Go ahead and look at benchmarks of web frameworks for Mono vs Java, its a 1:100 speed difference across the bank.
Cross-platform GUI-frameworks with a proper editor: non-existent for C#.
You are better off just using any of the Java at that point, cause having to type boilerplate for getters and setters isn't that much of a deal compared to all those other issues.
>>51891803
>Tfw using C# to create Win32 applications
Pic related
>>51891803
*You are better off just using Java at that point
>>51887918
>though you'll be supporting the hitler of our era, microsoft
Welp, the debate is over now. Free fags just lost.
>>51891827
Thats nice sweety, make sure to post your 4chan image loader in the /dpt/ once you are done.
>>51891837
Are free fags all NEETs?
>Mfw they are buttblasted over Windows even though it's like 98% marketshare and pretty much the only way to make money developing software for
>>51891839
I'm writing a botnet, u mad
Daily Reminder that anyone who hates C# is an unemployed, unshaven NEET with a bad haircut.
C# is love, C# is life.
>>51891853
I don't think all freefags are NEETs, some are still in highschool.
>>51892085
I mean... I like using Memeux too. I really like Debian but the level of autism on this board is very severe.
>Post winapi-related question in /dpt/
>LOL >WINDOWS FUCK OFF FAG
>Quick back to our fizzbuzzes in Haskell and talking about why x feature is completely groundbreaking
>>51889468
>entirely arbitrary requirement that main be a static member of a class?
That's not required, but it is a option.
