Single Vendor language

[Reddy G.]

I am afraid C# may become one vendor language like Visual Basic. Down the road it may become MS Cavasic(a name I coined). What about Linux? Is C# be implemented by GNU or some body for Linux?.

[Eddie Velasquez]

In a sense it would be no different than Java. But, it seems that Microsoft (unlike Sun) will let an independent standards organization standarize the language. If this is the case, and C# actually builds momentum, I think we could see several C# compiler vendors.

Let's wait and see. Just don't hold your breath! :-)

-------------------------------------------
I don't do it for the ratings, but it will tell me if my answer helped you.
A private message will do too.

I have read that MS plans to submit the language to ECMA for standardization. Which is something Java has yet to accomplish. I think it is in Microsoft's best interests to get the language standardized. If anything, it will really tweak Sun. Now, as far as anyone else implementing a C# compiler for Linux or any other OS, who knows. But I wouldn't at all be surprised to see it happen.

C# is designed for COM-support. Since COM is a Windows-only (COM needs the Windows-API) protocoll there won't be any other vendors. This language will only run for M$ operating systems. C# is just another try in M$-Monopoly.

[Eddie Velasquez]

COM isn't Windows-only, it's been implemented on several Unix platforms as well.

-------------------------------------------
I don't do it for the ratings, but it will tell me if my answer helped you.
A private message will do too.

[ALM]

Do you know if it's "free" on those UNIX platforms like it is on Windows? In other words, is it part of the OS, or do you (and your clients) have to spend thousands of dollars to get it installed on the UNIX machines.

Alvaro

[Eddie Velasquez]

I have no idea if it's free or not. I only know that it's available for Solaris and other UNIXes which I can't remember right now. I've read somewhere that somebody is implementing DCOM for Linux. (and it didn't seem to be a joke.)

-------------------------------------------
I don't do it for the ratings, but it will tell me if my answer helped you.
A private message will do too.

COM/DCOM ports to Unix platforms were primarily done by Software AG, a German company. For some wierd reason the tie-up with respect to this (DCOM) has been terminated. Moreover, COM+ will be supported only on Windows 2000 platform.

Even though Microsoft at one stage pursued the strategy of trying to make DCOM cross-platform, it seems to have decided against it for some reason or the other. Hence, even though DCOM was available for some Unix platforms, (of course are still available) the reliability of the port is something no major user has tested. Also keep in mind that these vendors no longer promote these ports as major products.

What this means is, C# will be restricted only to MS environments, unless Microsoft decides on a strategy change to effectively counter Java.

[Andreas Masur]

Why should somebody do this????

Andreas Masur

I'm not looking for ratings but they'll tell me how useful my help is.

Visual Basic is enormously popular despite being a single vendor language. So is Delphi from Borland. There is no question that standardization is a plus, however, there are many other factors important to consider in chosing a language for a given project. The book Extreme Programming makes the point that designing for the future (i.e. a future port to another platform) at the expense of current implementation time is often a mistake. As has been noted: All generalizations are false.

There are now rumors that Microsoft will eventually replace DCOM (not COM, just the remote invocation stuff) with SOAP. This statement was attributed to Don Box in a recent post somewhere (if anyone would know this, I'd think Don would be the guy). Maybe this is why the DCOM -> Unix port has been halted?

I heard a lot of talk from a lot of people at the PDC saying that DCOM is dead, to be replaced by COM+ and SOAP....

[peterchen]

Hi,

As much as I heard, MS proposed to give part of the C# and CLR stuff to some standardization comitee (hell knows how the US thingie is called). Of course MS wouldn't disagree with having C# and CLR on other platforms, and in fact, you don't need to port the Win32 API, but just the CLR to make things run on other platforms.

On the other hand, I guess it will go the old way. MS will have it's own extensions to the standard. MS will not invest in any port (until they buy linux ;-). The OpenSource guys will spent a few years in crating the one and only unique portable modular version C#-.NET-CLR-platform-enabled meta-compiler environment, until they notice the world has changed again.

Cheers
Peter