Is C# low-level lang ?[Resolved]

[Pirate]

I know C# isn't like C/C++ but it could inherits C/C++ abilities that's not in other langs. The question is : Can we categorize C#.NET under the low-level language(even to some extent) ?

Yes , or No .

Thanks

[hellswraith]

If you use it to write unmanaged code....sure. You have a lot of power when you use it to write unmanaged code, much like C++. But, if you needed to do any large amount of unmanaged code, why not just use C++ because you would be doing the same thing with a language that was really designed from the ground up to be lower level.

[Pirate]

Yah , I agree . The thing is, C# won't be typical low-level lang just like C/C++ because it requires framework to run . Like running under DOS (booting stuff) .I don't know , can we just call it half low-level lang.
Thanks 4 the input .

[wossname]

If you use it to write unmanaged code...

Do you mean just using normal API functions and not using the .net libraries?

[Mike Hildner]

Just butting in here, but I'll venture a guess that when hellswraith says "write unmanged code", it means writing code in an unsafe code block. I guess calling APIs would be accessing unmanged code, though.

[Cander]

Would still be running under the JIT though even if you used nothing but API's.

C# is never completely unmanaged and therefore nowhere near a low level language.

[Kasracer]

Since C# is tied into a framework, it is as high level as VB, however; since C# is standardized, someone could make a compiler that uses no framework at all but then you'd have to make all sorts of standard libraries and such for it to even be usable.

So C# could be as low level as C++ if someone wanted to basically reinvent the wheel, but as it stands it's quite high level.

[Pirate]

Thanks all . It's weird we all ended up to the same point . No fighting or lengthy nonsense discussion ...

[nemaroller]

We should fight and argue just for the sake of it though, otherwise this thread appears far less than a well discussed topic.

So I argue its as high a level as VB.Net.. but with the look and nuances (annoyances?) of low-level languages.

[AMDPwred]

C# is certainly not a low level language. As stated above, it has the ability to execute unmanaged code. But considering it requires a framework and runs in a managed environment, it should not be classified as a low level language.

[Pirate]

Is there any way I can close this thread !!!

[nemaroller]

I think if you say something very naughty and some reports it... it will get locked - that's just as good right?

[Pirate]

Ok , you piss me off and I'll ***** ya ....

[Graff]

C# is lower than assembly language... don't ask how it just accept it. It's the Jesus of code.

[Pirate]

C# is lower than assembly language... don't ask how it just accept it. It's the Jesus of code.

I'd take it as a joke.