[openbeos] Re: Support of C#
- From: Craig Turner <craig@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 19:33:13 +1030 (CST)
For anybody who cares, my minotor has just gone bung, isn't lighting up
properly, the dispay controls arn't working and it annoys the hell out of
me that I'll now have to buy a new one and had to share. It's really
'dull' for some reason. But still somewhat viewable.
> My suggestion is that y don't we develop support for C# because it
> would be easier for the user to code in and moreover C# also supports
> pointer manipulation which can be good for system level coding. And
> Microsoft have also given C# to standard's committee for its
> standardization unlike java which is to sun.
I came to a different but similar thought the other day.
And it has similarly yuck religious issues too ;)
I could see an argument for an effort (not necessarily linked to open
beos) to port the (excuse capitalisation problems) objective C support and the
nextstep API to Be. This would make porting easier from gnustep stuff and (more
importantly) mac os x.
And I have very little clue about coding in objective C or C++, and I'm not
sure it's really apprporiate for this project (so I kept quiet about t at the
time, although I've been having a cursory glance over the gnustep webpage). But
for it to happen would be a Good Thing (I think..).
(disclaimer: I'm a some-time webobjects developer ;) )
> Simplicity is what is needed in coding and BeOS C++ api
> is very simple but we can go a step further
> by supporting the next generation languages.
By the same token, I think a clear separation between two levels of
programming: C++ and python would have more advantage than porting C#.
In fact, if I'd been Microsoft, C# would never have existed and I would
have standardised on python, because I think that it has a very strong
future.
- C
Other related posts:
