Why [did you choose] C# ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JonnyPoet

Generally my opinion is: Every language has advantages in different sectors of programming, so you could not basically answer 'why C#'

---

Come on now. The "Why C#" was just the topic of my thread. I then immediately qualified it to be "C# in relation to C++/CLI".

Quote:

---

So I would suggest: If you are starting to develop a program you have to choos which language you are using. And then I would not ask why should I use C# but I would say OK, maybe I'll use C#. And requesting yourself regarding that program and its needs: Why not C' ? Are ther any points you can answer which would maybe lead you into problems using C' ? Which can easier/ quicker be done in C++ ? And only if this question leads to C++ then I would decide to do it in C++.

---

Yes but I already know Java and classic C++ extremely well. I also know the benefits/drawbacks of .NET in relation to portability ala Java. What I'm interested in is people's views regarding C# versus C++/CLI. This is the decision I'm facing.

What I got so far in favour of C# is not that convincing. A few bickerings about C++/CLI being to general is about all. Most people in favour of C# don't even seem to realize that C++/CLI is very far from classic C++. In fact C++/CLI seems quite ahead of C#.

In the context of web development and ASP.NET, C++/CLI is unusable (except for web services I believe). A lot of people migrate to C# from VB or Java because its easy to grok. Also, C++/CLI looks plain ugly. I think it exists solely as an "upgrade path" for C++ developers who want to write .NET apps but don't want/need to bother with C#.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sleezyb

In the context of web development and ASP.NET, C++/CLI is unusable (except for web services I believe). A lot of people migrate to C# from VB or Java because its easy to grok. Also, C++/CLI looks plain ugly. I think it exists solely as an "upgrade path" for C++ developers who want to write .NET apps but don't want/need to bother with C#.

---

Well if you think so, wouldn't it be appropriate to show how C# is better than C++/CLI then?

__uj,

It seems like you keep looking for something that C# can do, that C++/CLI cant. You will not find it, as that is not the reason for the existance of the language.

The driving force of C# is to provide a simpler to use development environment. The less that the programmer needs to deal with at the syntactical level, the easier it is to develop and the lower the risk of bugs. By lowering the bar, it is possible (and even somewhat likely) that less senior developers [read as those who will work for less money] can develop robust programs. This results in a lower TCO [total cost of ownership] in the business world. That is a very serious advantage (assuming it really proves itself over the long haul.

Even just the time it takes to create seperate header and implementation files in C++ can have a measurable (not necessarily overly significant) difference in the time it takes to create code. When you add up the "little" things it matters at the business level.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by _uj

If I recall it right, in your previous post, the existance of a destructor was what you held against C++/CLI. I don't think I agree.

---

I have nothing against the C++/CLI syntax for implementing IDispose by writing a function which looks like a standard C++ destructor.

I am saying that you never-the-less still need to write that function. C++/CLI does not remove the necessity to implement IDispose. Whether you call it ~MyClass (C++/CLI) or Dispose (c#) is of little consequence. The point is: You still have to write that function.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by _uj

Because of its general nature C++/CLI is more likely to be immune to fads. And I like that.

---

Except that Microsoft completely changed the syntax for .net compatible C++ code between VS2003 and VS2005.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by _uj

Well, I'm not fit enought at this point to determine whether you're bickerings are motivated. :)

---

Bickering?
:confused:

I'm just giving a few examples why I ended up choosing C# over C++/CLI for .net development.

Quote:

---

Except that Microsoft completely changed the syntax for .net compatible C++ code between VS2003 and VS2005.

---

To be correct. Microsoft actually published two different implementations for writing managed applications. VS-2003 used "Managed C++". This implementation violated many of the "approved" methods of extending C++ (including the nameing convention of keeping C++ at the begining of the name). With VS-2005, they published a NEW LANGUAGE EXTENSION call "C++/CLI".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheCPUWizard

__uj,

It seems like you keep looking for something that C# can do, that C++/CLI cant. You will not find it, as that is not the reason for the existance of the language.

The driving force of C# is to provide a simpler to use development environment.

---

I'm not looking for anything in particular but people usually have a motivation for their choises. I know C# has been around longer than C++/CLI so that might be a strong contributing factor to use it. C# is so strongly associated with .NET that C++/CLI isn't even considered an alternative.

Or, it can be as you say that C# really is the simpler language and thus easy to master and less error-prone. But to be honest, I'm not convinced. I've started to read up on C++/CLI and I can't see how it can be considered more complex than Java (which should be fairly equal to C#). Isn't this just a myth related to C++ being conceived as a hard language. But pure C++/CLI is nothing like classic C++. To me it seems as easy as C# or Java.

Code:

---

Or, it can be as you say that C# really is the simpler language and thus easier to master and less error-prone. But to be honest, I'm not convinced. I've started to read up on C++/CLI now and I can't see how it can be considered more complex than Java (which should be fairly equal to C#). Isn't this just a myth related to C++ being conceived as a hard language. But pure C++/CLI is nothing like classic C++. To me it seems as easy as C# or Java.

---

Just by alloswing "unsafe" code, C++/CLI is inherently and significantly more difficult and error prone than C#.

Even if you force "safe" code only, it is still more complex and therefore more error prone. Have you ever in C++ or C++/CLI mistyped a declaration between the header and cpp file [If you say NO, then I dont believe you :D ]. You get a compile error, have to go back and edit one (or both) of the source files and re-compile. In C#, this can not happen.

Granted that is a trivial example, but it does kill the argument the "C++/CLI" is "just as easy" as C#...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheCPUWizard

Have you ever in C++ or C++/CLI mistyped a declaration between the header and cpp file

---

Yes, for example:

Code:

---

class A
{
public:
    void f(int min, int max);
};


void A::f(int max, int min)
{
/// ....
}

---

:ehh:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by _uj

C# is so strongly associated with .NET that C++/CLI isn't even considered an alternative.

---

Personally, I did consider C++/CLI and even wrote a number of small programs with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by _uj

Or, it can be as you say that C# really is the simpler language and thus easy to master and less error-prone.

---

That is the conclusion I have come to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zaccheus

I have nothing against the C++/CLI syntax for implementing IDispose by writing a function which looks like a standard C++ destructor.

I am saying that you never-the-less still need to write that function. C++/CLI does not remove the necessity to implement IDispose. Whether you call it ~MyClass (C++/CLI) or Dispose (c#) is of little consequence. The point is: You still have to write that function.

---

If that's your point than I don't understand why you're replying to me?

Read what I said in #16 again. I question what TheCPUWizard wrote namely that implementing this interface was an example of how "handy" C# is. In my view it's often better to have a general feature which takes care of a situation. (although in essence the same code has to be provided in the end)

Quote:

---

Except that Microsoft completely changed the syntax for .net compatible C++ code between VS2003 and VS2005.

---

No they didn't. They introduced a whole new language in its own right called C++/CLI. They did this because Managed C++ turned out a failure.

It's not C++ anymore (which Managed C++ was). It's a totally new language sporting classic C++ as a subset. The CLI part draws heavily on experiences with C#.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by _uj

I've started to read up on C++/CLI and I can't see how it can be considered more complex than Java (which should be fairly equal to C#). Isn't this just a myth related to C++ being conceived as a hard language. But pure C++/CLI is nothing like classic C++. To me it seems as easy as C# or Java.

---

One example is the need to #include class declarations. In ANSI C++ the use of header files makes sense, because all information about a class is discarded after compilation. So you use a class in another source file, you have to include the class declaration in that source file.
But in Java and in .net, all the information about a class is maintained after compilation. Therefore you do not need to #include class declarations in C# or in Java. However, because C++/CLI is based on C++, you still need to split your class into declaration and implementation files, and you still need to decide which header files to include in which source files.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by _uj

(although in essence the same code has to be provided in the end)

---

That's all I was trying to say.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by _uj

They introduced a whole new language in its own right called C++/CLI.

---

Isn't that just another way of saying "They changed the syntax"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheCPUWizard

Just by alloswing "unsafe" code, C++/CLI is inherently and significantly more difficult and error prone than C#.

Even if you force "safe" code only, it is still more complex and therefore more error prone. Have you ever in C++ or C++/CLI mistyped a declaration between the header and cpp file [If you say NO, then I dont believe you :D ]. You get a compile error, have to go back and edit one (or both) of the source files and re-compile. In C#, this can not happen.

Granted that is a trivial example, but it does kill the argument the "C++/CLI" is "just as easy" as C#...

---

What's this fuss about header files. Isn't it just to include namespaces like say

using namespace System;

Have you written any programs in C# ?
Have you written any programs in C++/CLI ?

Perhaps people's preference for C# will make more sense if you write a simple, but meaningful, program in both languages.



Regarding the #includes:

In C#, the compiler automatically knows about the classes which you have declared in other source files in the same project. In C++/CLI you need to #include the class declarations in each source file where you want to use it, otherwise the compiler will not know about the other class - unless the class is declared in another DLL.