undefined | Better HN

0 pointsSomeone6d ago0 comments

> How .net got so many things right where java did not is a mystery to me

Part of the reason for that is that Java is older. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C_Sharp_(programming_language)...:

“In interviews and technical papers, he has stated that flaws in most major programming languages (e.g. C++, Java, Delphi, and Smalltalk) drove the fundamentals of the Common Language Runtime (CLR), which, in turn, drove the design of the C# language.”

Also, some of Java’s design warts may be there because Java was initially envisioned for much smaller devices.

0 comments

8 comments · 1 top-level

toyg6d ago· 7 in thread

This. C# was basically always meant to be "Java but done right". It came several years later, after Microsoft was legally barred from "EEE"-ing Java and required a direct competitor.

newsoftheday6d ago

> It came several years later, after Microsoft was legally barred

That is an eloquent way of re-writing the history of Microsoft stealing Java and not being allowed to get away with it.

toyg6d ago

They didn't "steal" anything, iirc; they started as a legitimate licensee and then tried their usual embrace/extend/extinguish as "J++" (the EEE I mentioned). Sun sued for breach of license and won, barring Microsoft from extending Java outside of the (Sun-controlled) process. So they dropped it and built their own version, with blackjack and hookers.

1 more reply

cm21876d ago

But what I don’t get reading the original article is that they present how to insert struct in an object oriented language as an intractable problem, whereas a good implementation with .net (as far as I can tell) has been out there for nearly 30 years. And C# was shameless about stealing from other languages.

SomeoneOP6d ago

> how to insert struct in an object oriented language as an intractable problem, whereas a good implementation with .net (as far as I can tell) has been out there for nearly 30 years. And C# was shameless about stealing from other languages.

I think (but may be wrong) their concerns are about the insert part. C# always had structs, Java wants to add them in a backward-compatible way. They want, for example, existing generic container classes pulled in from a .jar (i.e. already compiled) to support Java value types.

pjmlp6d ago

The problem is how to do it without breaking ABI, 30 years of Maven Central is very relevant, Java isn't doing a Python over value types.

1 more reply

Zardoz846d ago

Dlang this this before. You have classes and struts, with different semantics.

1 more reply

pjmlp6d ago

Ironically, they still do need Java for Azure, https://devblogs.microsoft.com/java

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

8 comments · 1 top-level

toyg6d ago· 7 in thread

This. C# was basically always meant to be "Java but done right". It came several years later, after Microsoft was legally barred from "EEE"-ing Java and required a direct competitor.

newsoftheday6d ago

> It came several years later, after Microsoft was legally barred

That is an eloquent way of re-writing the history of Microsoft stealing Java and not being allowed to get away with it.

toyg6d ago

1 more reply

cm21876d ago

SomeoneOP6d ago

pjmlp6d ago

The problem is how to do it without breaking ABI, 30 years of Maven Central is very relevant, Java isn't doing a Python over value types.

1 more reply

Zardoz846d ago

Dlang this this before. You have classes and struts, with different semantics.

1 more reply

pjmlp6d ago

Ironically, they still do need Java for Azure, https://devblogs.microsoft.com/java

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse