New to C#

[Winanjaya]

Dear The Expert,

I was VB6 developer and I do not anything about C++, my question is : should I learn C++ before learning C#?

Regards
Winanjaya

[dynamic_sysop]

if you try learning C# first , then C++ starts to look much easier

[Winanjaya]

Is that mean C# more difficult than C++? , what do you think should I learn hard for moving from VB6 to C#? .. please advise ..

Thanks

Winanjaya

[dynamic_sysop]

C# is easier than C++ , but if you are coming from vb6 , try starting with vb.net , then C# will seem a lot easier ( it's a cross between vb.net and C++ in a lot of ways )

[Winanjaya]

Thanks for your advises, I will start VB.NET now then C#, I will be the most active user in this forum ..

[Kasracer]

Originally posted by Winanjaya
Thanks for your advises, I will start VB.NET now then C#, I will be the most active user in this forum ..

Do you really want to learn VB?

If you don't, just go right into C#. While they both can use the same/similar syntax in certain areas, alot of the little things are different and you'll get yourself really confused if all you wanted was to learn C#.

My thinking is, if you want to learn C++, learn C++. If you want to learn C#, learn C#. If you want to learn VB, learn VB.

While knowing 1 language (depending upon which language it is) can help you learn other(s) quickly, if you only want to learn a certain language, don't bore yourself with the other ones.

[MasterBlaster]

Learn C#. there is more and better documentation available on C#. Neither is harder than the other. VB and C# are totally different monsters than vb6.

[Winanjaya]

Thanks for all of advises, but what's the best VB.NET or C#? I meant (the best from speed performance, reliable or something like that) ..

TIA

Winanjaya

[Kasracer]

Originally posted by Winanjaya
Thanks for all of advises, but what's the best VB.NET or C#? I meant (the best from speed performance, reliable or something like that) ..

TIA

Winanjaya

C#

[Sgt-Peppa]

I don't know if I recall that correctly, but as far as I know the .NET Framework itselfe was written in C#!

So I guess that should make your decission easy, hä,

Stephan

[Kasracer]

Originally posted by Sgt-Peppa
I don't know if I recall that correctly, but as far as I know the .NET Framework itselfe was written in C#!

So I guess that should make your decission easy, hä,

Stephan

No, it isn't. Almost all Microsoft code is written in C++, including the framework.

I highly doubt they would write something so critical, like their OS and Kernel, in C++ and then create a framework in C#. Just sounds stupid to me.

Longhorn will be using alot of managed code, in fact most of the OS will be made up of managed code.

[DevGrp]

Originally posted by kasracer
No, it isn't. Almost all Microsoft code is written in C++, including the framework.

I highly doubt they would write something so critical, like their OS and Kernel, in C++ and then create a framework in C#. Just sounds stupid to me.

Longhorn will be using alot of managed code, in fact most of the OS will be made up of managed code.

Most of the framework and parts of the IDE is written in C#. Also the VB.NET namespaces are written in VB.NET. I remember reading an interview with Anders Hejlisberg (sp) and him saying that.

[hellswraith]

Originally posted by DevGrp
Most of the framework and parts of the IDE is written in C#. Also the VB.NET namespaces are written in VB.NET. I remember reading an interview with Anders Hejlisberg (sp) and him saying that.

Yep, that is correct.

[Kasracer]

Originally posted by DevGrp
Most of the framework and parts of the IDE is written in C#. Also the VB.NET namespaces are written in VB.NET. I remember reading an interview with Anders Hejlisberg (sp) and him saying that.

Link?

I just can't see Microsoft using C# for a framework, which is very important, when they are STILL developing most of their software with C++.

Not trying to call you a liar or anything, I'd just like some proof.

I wonder if they used a modified version of C#, because I couldn't stand making something as large as a framework and NOT being able to use Templates.

[hellswraith]

This about Borland's product...
http://samgentile.com/blog/posts/9826.aspx


I am looking for the links that say parts of the VS.Net IDE was written in C#. I have seen them, and I have watched a MSDN show that says it also. I will try to find them, and post for you.
I am almost positive it is in one of these episodes:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/theshow/Archive.asp

[hellswraith]

Still haven't found the exact quote, and I am tired of looking right now. The Web Matrix was developed completely with C#:

ASP.NET Web Matrix was created entirely using Microsoft .NET, Windows Forms, and C#. Learn more about the project, and the team behind it.

Just thought I would mention that, since it was developed by the same developers working on VS.Net. I believe they took a lot of code from the VS.Net version to create the web matrix...but that is my own assumption, can't back that up.

[DevGrp]

Originally posted by kasracer
Link?

I just can't see Microsoft using C# for a framework, which is very important, when they are STILL developing most of their software with C++.

Not trying to call you a liar or anything, I'd just like some proof.

I wonder if they used a modified version of C#, because I couldn't stand making something as large as a framework and NOT being able to use Templates.

This was taken from Brad Abrams blog here . He is the CLR Program Manager. Look at the bottom of the page.

* In V1 and V1.1, we didn't have a cross-language linker (al works but only produces multi-module assemblies which we wanted to avoid).

* On the BCL team, we have ~900 methods that call directly into the CLR to do tricky or internal things, and about 50 of those couldn't be written in C# because the language wasn't powerful enough. Managed C++ would have helped us, but C# later added features that put it roughly on par with Managed C++.

From this, hopefully you can understand why the .NET Framework is written almost exclusively in C#. (I think we have two exceptions – a Managed C++ dll for COM Interop custom marshalers, and I think there's one small piece written directly in IL but I don’t recall where.) Given a cross-language linker, we might consider rewriting some isolated pieces in managed C++, but we haven't had a serious need yet to add this complexity to our build process.

[CornedBee]

The Mono project follows the same approach. Most of the framework there is written in C#, small parts in C. The C# compiler itself is written in C#.

The idea behind it is, if you have an easy language to develop managed stuff, why instead use something hard to use (Managed C++, the Mono C API for their CLR)?
Especially since Managed C++ ends up as IL anyway, so you haven't even got any speed gain.

[Sgt-Peppa]

Originally posted by kasracer
No, it isn't. Almost all Microsoft code is written in C++, including the framework.

I highly doubt they would write something so critical, like their OS and Kernel, in C++ and then create a framework in C#. Just sounds stupid to me.

Longhorn will be using alot of managed code, in fact most of the OS will be made up of managed code.

Seems like I was'nt that wrong after all

[Kasracer]

Originally posted by CornedBee
The Mono project follows the same approach. Most of the framework there is written in C#, small parts in C. The C# compiler itself is written in C#.

The idea behind it is, if you have an easy language to develop managed stuff, why instead use something hard to use (Managed C++, the Mono C API for their CLR)?
Especially since Managed C++ ends up as IL anyway, so you haven't even got any speed gain.

Yeah I guess that's true, Managed C++ sucks

Now the question is, do they use the same C# language we use, or did they add other things into the language like templates? I would think it would be fairly difficult to create a framework if you couldn't use templates!

[dynamic_sysop]

Managed C++ doesn't Suck really though , apart from a few minor differences , you can soon see the similarities to C# , also there's a few things that are similar to vb.net in there too.

[CornedBee]

It's extremly error-prone to use, what with all the extra stuff you have to do, and it doesn't gain you anything. Unless you want to interface an existing C++ DLL with .Net, which is what ManC++ was made for.