The Future of C#, Part One

re: The Future of C#, Part One

Russ — Sun, 25 Apr 2010 07:00:52 GMT

(Old discussion, but I just cannot resist.)

Bo said:

"It would be such a trivial thing to do."

How do you know this? What knowledge of the world--or even just of the c# compiler codebase--do you possess from which you can derive any confidence in this belief. You are, nevertheless, so confident, that you go on to assert the following:

"The only conclusion that I can draw from it is Microsoft never cares about what scientists or engineers think or use."

You are so perfectly sure that the thing you want is so trivial that the only possible reason that it has not been implemented is that Microsoft (as a company) does not care about you and your colleagues.

Perhaps Microsoft is disliked on campuses, as you say, because people like you judge motives instead of trying to understand the enormous problems they face and to appreciate the significant contribution that they have made to human civilization.

В Инфуфа веруем: диалог

Блог Эрика Липперта (перевод) — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 23:57:56 GMT

Пользователь: Оператор typeof(T) в C#, по существу, означает «компилятор, сгенерируй некий код, который

In Foof We Trust: A Dialogue

Fabulous Adventures In Coding — Fri, 22 May 2009 20:43:33 GMT

User : The typeof(T) operator in C# essentially means “compiler, generate some code that gives me an

re: The Future of C#, Part One

Reineir Post — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 12:23:46 GMT

Is conversion included?: Last February, I converted a 100,000 line VB.NET code base to C#. Didn't manage to find a tool that makes it painless. Let me know if you want details (<reinpost@win.tue.nl>).

C# Dynamic - CSharp's new feature of the coming version 4.0

Journal of Abu Sayed Mohammad Ismail — Wed, 24 Dec 2008 09:38:21 GMT

Very good resources for the coming version... Sam Ng Dynamic in C# Part One Dynamic in C# Part Two Chris

Variância e Contra-variância: uma dívida

Arquitetura em Pauta — Sat, 29 Nov 2008 17:31:53 GMT

Tenho que pagar uma dívida aqui. Falei na volta do PDC que iria falar sobre variância e contra-variância

Community Convergence XLVII

Charlie Calvert's Community Blog — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 00:11:48 GMT

Welcome to the 47th Community Convergence. We had a very successful trip to PDC this year. In this post

re: The Future of C#, Part One

Jim — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 19:55:17 GMT

I second Bo's comment about adding complex number support. The engineering community is a large relatively untapped market...we would love to be able to see native support of complex numbers in a compliler!

True, there are many third party numerical libraries available that fill this need, but having a built-in complex type would greatly simplify the use of these libraries -- remember most engineers are engineers, not elegant programmers. I don't see it as creating bloat or complexity (pardon the pun) in the existing Math library...it would require overloading for Abs, +-*/, exp,log,and trig functions, as well as the creation of a new ' (conjugate) operator.

Please, please, please. Minimum effort/code change on MS part in exchange for much wider (and well-funded!) audience.

re: The Future of C#, Part One

Bo — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 06:21:10 GMT

Hi Eric,

To be honest, I still do not understand why C# does not have complex numbers built in. It would be such a trivial thing to do. (if there is an exuse for matrix)

The only conclusion that I can draw from it is Microsoft never cares about what scientists or engineers think or use. We use complex as much as we use double!

This partially explains to me why Microsoft is disliked on campuses (to put it mildly), which I did not understand for a while.

While scientists are poor guys who do not buy much software, we do tell our students what to learn and use. That is a lot of potential users and customers!

If only Java had better support for scientific computing, Sun Micro would not be in its position today.

re: The Future of C#, Part One

Is conversion included? — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 00:26:14 GMT

Is there a cross compiler to convert VB.NET code to C#? It is on our must have list since we have standardized on C# and away from VB.NET. This would be a big plus because over time C# and VB.NET should move together and converge into an identical feature set.