talan,
.NET is used everywhere - in enterprises, web sites, application development, research and even games (XNA, Unity).
It's not used in commercial software development. It's not used in operating system development. It's not used in device drivers. Basically, it's not used by anyone who needs to do real high performance programming. Why is that? Well, basically because it's not capable of it.
If you did software development rather than your hobby stuff, or your IT applets, or your web programming, or whatever it is you do, you'd know that.
Your information about performance of modern VMs and their languages (C#, Java) is pathetically outdated. Very reminiscent of assembly programmers complaining about the performance of C, and C programmers complaining about the performance of C++.
That's funny, because I used to be an assembly programmer and I switched to C the minute my boss showed me proof that C language ran just as fast. That was 1991. Prior to that the object code C language generated was not quite as efficient as assembly. It isn't POSSIBLE for anything to ever be MORE efficient than assembly. So that makes C language the fastest compiled programming language in the world. You know what? C++ is right there with C. You know what's not even in the same league? CLR.
How is it that you believe a "managed" application which has to make calls to an external third party runtime engine to do anything at all could even be remotely as good as the language that was used to code the operating system AND that very external third party runtime engine? You talk like you know something, and then you go and say something absurd like that?
Despite what you may think, C++ isn't the answer to everything. Not all operating systems are written in C++, Unix and unix-like OSs are written in C.
You think splitting hairs and arguing semantics will let you off the hook? :D
Not all commercial software is written in C++, you're bullshitting completely.
Right! Some of it is still written in C! Oracle, for instance!
You're dodging like a motherfucker so I suspect you know the truth about commercial and industrial software development.
People also don't program in C++ because there are better tools for the job, not because ITZ HARD.
I could list a lot of people who got fired during their probationary period because they couldn't grasp C++ who'd disagree with you about that
You want to say C++ is a good tool for certain jobs, go ahead, saying its the only tool for all programming is stupid. Really stupid. Only a delusional person could say that with a straight face
I didn't say that. In fact, I said that if Java had some better GUI layout tools and better runtime performance that I'd use it myself for small tasks. I hope your programming skills are better than your reading comprehension.
Let A, B be sets.
i) A is a subset of B.
ii) Therefore, B is a superset of A.
You assert that A is a subset of B, but A is a standalone set. It contains no part of B. B, on the other hand, incorporates A in its entirety and uses it as a base on which to expand. A is not derived from B but without A, B could not exist. B is a superset of A, but A is not a subset of B.
Your logic is flawed. You're probably not much of a programmer, with your reading comprehension problems, your logic errors, your shitty attitude, and your nitpicking over details while ignoring the elephant in the room. No wonder you code in CLR.
You pretty much said the same thing he did, only instead of the relationship of A to B, you did B to A. WHAT DID YOU LEARN IN SKOOL? And he's right about C almost being a C++ subset.. Want to know who agrees with him? THE CREATOR OF C++
He inverted the relationship. No big deal. "Almost" is close enough when it comes to programming, isn't it?
And here is what the CREATOR OF C++ said:
Bjarne Stroustrup:
In the strict mathematical sense, C isn't a subset of C++. There are programs that are valid C but not valid C++ and even a few ways of writing code that has a different meaning in C and C++. However, C++ supports every programming technique supported by C. Every C program can be written in essentially the same way in C++ with the same run-time and space efficiency. It is not uncommon to be able to convert tens of thousands of lines of ANSI C to C-style C++ in a few hours. Thus, C++ is as much a superset of ANSI C as ANSI C is a superset of K&R C and much as ISO C++ is a superset of C++ as it existed in 1985.
I bolded the relevant parts for you, due to your reading comprehension problem. Hope that helps.
ME:
Any C++ compiler will compile a C language project.
YOU:
Bullshit; modern C++ and C are now siblings (see last paragraphy in link above).
He points out a few exceptions where C++ can't handle C language code snippets, and you use that to call "bullshit" on my claim that any C++ compiler will compile C language projects? Are you a moron or something? I've compiled hundreds of C language projects with a C++ compiler the last 20 years. You know what? It's been 25 years since you could even BUY a C compiler that was not also a C++ compiler. It's the same compiler! JFC. I can't believe I'm wasting my time with you.
Here's a snippet from that last paragraph that I guess you missed:
Bjarne Stroustrup:
Except for a few examples such as the ones shown above (and listed in detail in the C++ standard and in Appendix B of The C++ Programming Language (3rd Edition)), C++ is a superset of C.
Enjoy!
ME:
CLR isn't even RELATED to C/C++ except for Microsoft's pretentious and misleading branding.
YOU:
I humbly disagree with you. Want to know who also disagrees with you? THE CREATOR OF C++
Bjarne Stroustrup:
C++/CLI is a set of extensions to ISO C++ that provides an extremely complete "binding" of C++ to Microsoft's CLI (Common Language Infrastructure). It has been standardized by ECMA (ECMA-372). I am happy that it makes every feature of the CLI easily accessible from C++ and happy that C++/CLI is a far better language than its predecessor "Managed C++". However, I am less happy that C++/CLI achieves its goals by essentially augmenting C++ with a separate language feature for each feature of CLI (interfaces, properties, generics, pointers, inheritance, enumerations, and much, much more). This will be a major source of confusion (whatever anyone does or says). The wealth of new language facilities in C++/CLI compared to ISO Standard C++ tempts programmers to write non-portable code that (often invisibly) become intimately tied to Microsoft Windows.
I'm not sure where in there you think he's saying that CLI is related to C++. It seems to me he's talking about Microsoft building some extensions that provide a C++ interface for CLI. CLI itself has more in common with Pascal and Delphi, since they were all created by the same guy. Anyway, it seems Bjarne Stroustrup may be a little too much for you to be able to grasp, though I do appreciate you going straight to the source in your frantic effort to defend your pathetic programming language of choice. Kudos for that. I recommend this one for you:
http://www.dummies.com/how-to/computers ... splus.html
For next time you want to be an asshole and start raging about how CLR is just as good as all the real programming languages.
their efforts and will certainly give it a try.
