c# worth learning?

[csnyder]

Love C#. All for learning C#. C# is good.

C# is a cross between vb6 and c++. You get true OO programming and the luxury of RAD. It's still a question whether it will take off, but most of us who know .NET love it.

Do you prefer writing c++ of vb? If you prefer vb, then think about VB.NET.

[hellswraith]

What I think in cool about C# compaired to VB.Net is it dosen't shield you too much from the complexities of .Net. Everything is like it should be with a true OO type language. None of this MyBase stuff...instead you use the 'this' keyword and such. It is more inline with C++ and Java ways of doing things. I love C#.

[csnyder]

Yeah, even those who know vb6 and move to .NET seem to prefer C# over vb.net.

I ordered a new computer yesterday. That mean I can finally get VS.NET. Woohoo!!!

[Jethro]

Disagree, have moved from vb6 to .net and still prefer vb.net over C#. Am presuming with c# you still need framework on the computer you are going to distribute your app too, if so kind of defeats the purpose in my opinion....

[hellswraith]

Defeats what purpose?

How long did you spend with C#? My guess is not very long. It takes a couple weeks to get fully used to it, but once I did, VB.Net code just didn't look as good anymore. Of course that is me, and not everyone will have the same experience as I did.

[Cander]

Originally posted by Jethro
Disagree, have moved from vb6 to .net and still prefer vb.net over C#. Am presuming with c# you still need framework on the computer you are going to distribute your app too, if so kind of defeats the purpose in my opinion....

What purpose? It is all about choice. Some people are just more comfortable with the C# syntax. The only major difference between VB and C# beyond syntax is the C# is a standard and any .NET compilers are most likely to only compile C#. Chances of a cross platform VB .NET compiler is nill...although a compiled VB app should still run on a Linux framework if it is written properly to standards.

[Jethro]

Clearly didn't explain myself here. One of the major advantages to C and then C++ was portability between OSs, if you have to drag along all the framework stuff it kind of defeats the purpose of portability. Mind you l guess not all unix systems are equal....


hellswraith, you are quite correct haven't really started looking at C# (pronouced sharp don't you know) and it looks like l might now be dragged off into PHP, which was what l was doing before .net Gee l wish l could be a manager and make these sorts of decisions.....

[markman]

I think Ill stick with no for now. Ive heard the sytax is simple; i could pick it up quickly if necessary.

GO C++!!!!!!

[csnyder]

C#'s syntax may be simple, but the .NET Framework and runtime libraries isn't quite as simple. The closest thing that comes to it is Java (and I really don't know how close, because I don't know Java that well), but to do anythng, you have to learn a whole new API.

[MasterBlaster]

Originally posted by csnyder
but to do anythng, you have to learn a whole new API.

True but everything is laid out so simply in the framework that everything is easy to find. IMHO It's all about syntax. I switched from C++ then to VB6 and now C#. VB.net is way to verbose for it's own good. Verbose to the point it is harder to read than VB6. The one perk about C# is most of the 3rd party documentation and MSDN Samps are in C#. I hear a lot of people complain about the .net framework. Why complain. I for one will not complain when someone gives me an easy to use lump of code tweaked to the max that I probably would have to code myself any way. It is a powerfull tool. My first Hello world app in C++ was considered bloated compared to the one I wrote in C some odd years ago. Disk is cheap these days and the framework only dogs out your comp considerably the first time it fires up after a fresh reboot.

[JoeSki]

One of the things that I like about C# is that you can create XML documentation while you write your apps. This makes it perfect for creating class libraries, as others who use those libraries in the future will have information about how your classes work and know exactly what your methods do.

But on the other hand VB makes creating the user interface MUCH easier, in that you can use the drop-down lists at the top of the development environment to add event handlers. Wiring up events is kinda a pain in the ass in C#.

So, I don’t think one language is better than the other, they each have their strengths and weaknesses, but I think C# is totally worth learning.

[MasterBlaster]

Each Control Has the events listed in the propertys window. All you have to do is dbl click on them to code an event. I hadn't noticed it myself and was coding them by hand too.

[abdul]

The syntax of C# is pretty similar to C++. If you already know C++ then it won't that hard to pick up with C#. Although I don't find why Microsoft even developed C# when they already made VB OO and put other features in it.

[Scott Penner]

They developed C# because it's better than both VB and C++.
Having programmed in both I would have to agree.

The idea in C++ that you can ignore errors is a piece of garbage. That's how nasty bugs like access violations can slip through when C# would have caught it immediately and forced you to deal with them...

Garbage collection and Winforms alse make C# far easier to work
with than C++.

VB is just a dog now...I hate maintaining my legacy code. I wish I could just throw away all my VB code and just use C#!!

[PT Exorcist]

nah vb still rules


but in some time i believe vb will start sucking each time more untill C# gets his riverbed

[Redth]

I'm just beginning to move towards c#... originally i had just planned to go into vb.net which is already a serious change from vb6... having almost no c++ experience, and some php experience, i was all for the vb/asp syntax. However, one key thing has pursuaded me to go to c# instead of vb.net ....

c# is microsoft's new toy... they've told people at their seminars that c# is their new language and eventually vb could be phased out. I was at a fork in the road where learning c# and vb.net would be the same amount of work.. i'd imagine many other people are out there like me... why not learn a newer technology?

there are other reasons why c# is better, including the fact stated before that any other compilers would probably support c# only, and c# would almost always be the language of choice when programming for multiple operating systems...

quite a clear choice to me :/ though, it is tough switching.. i'm at the point where i know a lot of vb6, and have projects going still in vb6, but i'm trying to learn c#, but i don't know enough c# to code things usefully yet... but i'm gonna stick it out and learn!

also, a university i will be applying to this year (University of Waterloo in Ontario, Canada), has joined microsoft in a sense and is making c# a required course for the computer sciences programming... so, hopefully i'll be one up on them if i end up going there ...

[hellswraith]

To add to what Redth was saying:
If you come from VB6, you already know the syntax, and you have come to expect certain things from VB that isn't there in VB.Net. I see so many people get frustrated because they are trying to make old habbits work in VB.Net. Now take a VB programmer that moves to C#. They are totaly new to the syntax, and therefore looking at the documentation, trying new things out, etc. You will generally be more accepting of the .Net Framework if you are learning the new language from scratch. Once you learn C#, you can go over to VB.Net easily because you have .Net framework knowledge and your prior VB6 knowledge. The transition is very smooth. I am now having fun with both languages, but I lean WAY over on C# though because I feel it isn't as combersome as VB.Net is.

[CornedBee]

About the only current difference between VB.NET and C# is syntax. VB is - well -VB, while C# is Java. MS did not invent C#, they took the Java syntax and built a compiler that compiles to .NET apps.

Scott Penner: The idea in C++ that you can ignore errors is a piece of garbage. That's how nasty bugs like access violations can slip through when C# would have caught it immediately and forced you to deal with them...

I have to disagree. In fact, I have to disagree heavily.

int *p = 0;
*p = 23;

IF C# knew pointers, would it catch this? It wouldn't, and this is about the simplest access vioation you can do. You can't ignore errors in C++. How the hell did you come up with that idea?

[hellswraith]

C# is not Java. That is like saying C and C++ are the same. Just because two languages share a lot of the same type of stuff, doesn't mean they are the same.

Also, C# can do pointers, although it isn't recommended.

Why do you hate C# so much, it is a great language, even though it takes all the good stuff from the other languages out there.

[CornedBee]

I don't hate C#. I didn't say I hate C#.
BUT someone up there said C# is so much better than C++, and I just happen to love C++.
And someone (and MS) said MS invented C#, by taking C++ and stripping away all unnecessary, overly complicated and dangerous parts. That's exactly what Sun did, and the result LOOKS the same. Give C# and Java source to a VB6 or C++ programmer and they probably couldn't tell it apart without extensive looking.
Java doesn't know real namespaces, but that's the only large difference I see.
Both are compiled to bytecode (MSIML or JBC).
The large difference between the two is what goes on under the hood. But look at it this way: For both Java and C#, the command to write something to the console is
System.Console.WriteLine

And now they want to introduce J# too - total waste IMHO.


I want to repeat it again: you cannot ignore errors in C++!

[Scott Penner]

Sorry to argue with you...

I use C++ all the time, and it doesn't force you to handle errors in many situations. Most ATL methods return an HRESULT. Do I have to look at the HRESULT? No! Of course it makes no sense and it's poor programming, but I can ignore it. Then, I can get an access violation or some other ambiguous error somewhere down the road that is not so easily traced back to the problem. This happens. It is a fact. In the world of C# an exception is thrown that would halt execution at that line unless dealt with.

I would say a majority of MFC / ATL methods return error codes instead of raising exceptions. Do you disagree?

Just for grins...Does a release build of this code throw an error?

  int i [20];
  i[20] = 5;

[CornedBee]

It might. This code will:
vector<int> vi(20);
vi[20] = 100;

But the thing is: this is not a feature of C#. This is a feature of the CLR, that it ONLY throws exceptions and never returns error codes. I can achieve the same using managed C++.
Seen this way, I admit that you can ignore library errors in non-managed languages (C, C++, Pascal, ...), I only thought about language errors.

MFC suffers from it's age. It is older than exceptions, older than the STL and older than RTTI.

[CornedBee]

IMO, C# is worth learning if you don't care that you can only program windows .NET with it. If you already know VB.NET, I see no point in learning it. If you already know C++, you can go for managed C++ if you plan to use it from time to time, or learn C# (only a small step) if you want to use .NET heavily.

[Scott Penner]

Yeah that's what I meant.
It's not a knock on unmanaged C++, it's just a small difference that can make all dot net languages (you're right, not just C#) a bit easier to debug.

C# is a cool language, but you're definitely boarding the M$ bus if it's all you know. But, I guess the same applies to VB...

[hellswraith]

I admit that using C++ gives you the freedom of writing for different OS's, but I think real soon that you will see C# being used on different OS's too. If you haven't seen the Mono project, then it might be worth a look.
http://www.go-mono.com/

[Akumitsu]

I think c# will be a worthy language of at least knowing in the future, it might come in handy, you never know. It's pretty easy to learn too depending on your programming background.

[bibbouk]

I've a VB developer but I've been using C# for over a year and I love it. Looking at all Microsofts press releases and documentation I get the impression that they will push C# as the primary .net language. While VB.net in many ways is just as powerful as C# I think that if you go the VB.net route it would pay to gradually build up your C# skillset on the side

[PT Exorcist]

i cant understand why all this chat...i work in vb.net and when i look at C# sintax i understand all as well as vb.net...omg...they are exactly the same..the logic is the same...why dont learn C# or VB.NET and learn the sintax of the other? they are the same..some times u find the code in C# other in VB.NET but its almost the same...

[hellswraith]

PT Exorcist you absolutly correct, but the problem is most VB.Net people don't even want to learn C#. They complain when I give them an example in C# because they don't even want to learn the syntax enough so they can convert code.

I love knowing the syntax of both languages. I can convert back and forth relatively easy. I try to tell everyone that knowing both is just going to give you more source code to look at and use. Then you can pick the language you like, and use it.

[CornedBee]

Or use both, thanks to the .NET mechanism.

[made_of_asp]

Is it true or not that C# runs 15% of the speed of C++? Seems Slow...

M.

[CornedBee]

That depends.

Normal C++ is faster, as it is native code, opposed to the bytecode of C# or Managed C++.

Depending on the usage C# would reach about 50 to 95% of the speed of C++. The usage might be CPU-intensive algorithms (50% or even less) over memory-intensive algorithms (80-90%) over waiting for hard disks and other devices to do something (95-99%) to waiting for user input (100%).

The typical office application will not be noticeably slower on average, a game will suffer heavily.
.NET was developed for office applications though, not for games.

[hellswraith]

I remember seeing a game engine that was wrote in C#. From what I have heard, it really isn't that slow either.

[PT Exorcist]

that kind of ppl should not be real programmers...real programms get interested by understanding the logic behind programs, behind languages, behind the machine and not only by 1 damn sintax..

Originally posted by hellswraith
PT Exorcist you absolutly correct, but the problem is most VB.Net people don't even want to learn C#. They complain when I give them an example in C# because they don't even want to learn the syntax enough so they can convert code.

I love knowing the syntax of both languages. I can convert back and forth relatively easy. I try to tell everyone that knowing both is just going to give you more source code to look at and use. Then you can pick the language you like, and use it.

[Lethal]

Yeah, I've also decided to make the switch from vb to C#. To be quite honest, I'm getting to the point where I am getting sick of developing in vb. Like someone above stated, vb.net it to verbose. However, that does not mean I'm not going to learn and practice the language. I like the fact that I now get to re-learn a language all over again.

I've also talked to companys where they are more inclined to higher someone with c# skills over vb.net b/c typically, C# programmers are porting from languages such as C++, Java, or other oop centric languages. In the employers eyes, he or she is more versed in oop development.

Just my 2 cents..

[venerable bede]

I program in GWBasic.

Much better than VB.Net or C#

[DPritchard]

My 2 Cents:

I used to code in C & C++ throughout college and for quite awhile after, but the companies I worked for tended to focus on visual basic... so out of nessisity, VB became my primary platform. As .NET came into the picture, I naturally grew into VB.NET, and, after a great deal of frustration, I gradually learned to love the changes.

Now I find myself facing the same choices I made back when I went from a C++ programmer to a VB programmer... the demand in the job market. The sad fact, in these parts anyway, is that .NET programmers still aren't in huge demand at all (I sure hope that will change soon). But of those companies that ARE looking for .NET professionals... most seem to want those with a c# background. So here I go again. I'm not "switching" from vb.net to C#... but I'm definately working toward being equally comfortable with both languages.

Other than that... I still have trouble seeing any significant advantage of one over the other over the scope of things.

[CornedBee]

Since you already know C++ AND VB.NET it should be a snap for you to learn C#.

[Lethal]

Yeah, I didn't have the luxury of knowing C++, however, I have had a little experience with J++.

It's only been about 4 days since I began my quest in C#, and I already feel very comfortable with the syntax and language. Once you know what the functionality the framework offers or how to find out, the rest is fairly straight forward.

[CornedBee]

Yes, indeed. I didn't know how to keep my app from exiting, so I thought "Well, a message loop is something that concerns the whole app, so let's see if there is an 'Application' class." What should I say, there is one and I found the method I need.