what programing language makes the smallest code

[JuggaloBrotha]

That's why I have hated the .NET Framework since the very first moment it was released.

You probably wont mind it so much if you're running Windows 7

[esposito]

You probably wont mind it so much if you're running Windows 7

I won't mind it until the next version of the .NET Framework is released. Then, if I want to stay updated, I will once again have to care about the Framewok hell.

If you use .NET, you will never be able to produce a piece of software which can run on a pendrive, as you can't know whether the final user has the FW installed on his machine.

So, to answer the original question that originated this thread (if I were to write apps, the smaller the better I'd think. So what programing language makes the smallest program?), all we can say with absolute certainty is, .NET is the last language on earth that can help you make small programs.

[JuggaloBrotha]

I won't mind it until the next version of the .NET Framework is released. Then, if I want to stay updated, I will once again have to care about the Framewok hell.

Framework hell? That's in interesting comment about .Net. I have yet to see where 1 version overwrites and screws up another version of .Net, since they're all installed side by side there's really no problem, but you call that flexibility a 'hell'? That just seems really far fetched. I've seen the Frameworks fix a heck of a lot more than any problems they've caused. I guess it's just a matter of preference really, then again no one's forcing you to program w/ .Net either so if ya don't like the hell it brings, there's plenty of other languages to choose from.

If you use .NET, you will never be able to produce a piece of software which can run on a pendrive, as you can't know whether the final user has the FW installed on his machine.

Technically you can't do that with any language really, but yes it is a bit of a problem if that's what you need to do right now and you're a .Net programmer.

[esposito]

Framework hell? That's in interesting comment about .Net. I have yet to see where 1 version overwrites and screws up another version of .Net, since they're all installed side by side there's really no problem, but you call that flexibility a 'hell'? That just seems really far fetched. I've seen the Frameworks fix a heck of a lot more than any problems they've caused. I guess it's just a matter of preference really, then again no one's forcing you to program w/ .Net either so if ya don't like the hell it brings, there's plenty of other languages to choose from.

By "Framework hell" I simply mean the fact that the final users needs to have the right version of the FW installed on his computer to be able to run your application.

I know there are plenty of other languages to choose from. I have been using Delphi for more than two years by now and I can assure you that the idea of switching to .NET has never hovered on the edge of my mind.

Technically you can't do that with any language really, but yes it is a bit of a problem if that's what you need to do right now and you're a .Net programmer.

Believe me, creating standalone programs that can be run from a pendrive can be done in Delphi without any problems.

[akhileshbc]

By "Framework hell" I simply mean the fact that the final users needs to have the right version of the FW installed on his computer to be able to run your application.

I think Framework 4 contains all the components of Framework 3.5 (ie. previous versions) plus additional features... So, there will be no need of installing separate versions. Just install the latest version....
(I don't know much about that... Pardon me if it is wrong.. ) ...

[JuggaloBrotha]

I think Framework 4 contains all the components of Framework 3.5 (ie. previous versions) plus additional features... So, there will be no need of installing separate versions. Just install the latest version....
(I don't know much about that... Pardon me if it is wrong.. ) ...

Nope, Framework 4.0 is only Framework 4.0 additions to the Framework stacks.

Everything that runs in the Framework 4 is actually running on the 2.0 Framework, which is why it's a requirement to have the 2.0 Framework installed in the first place. This is also how Framework targetting in VS 2008 and VS 2010 is possible too.

Here's roughly what's going on: 2.0 <- 3.0 <- 3.5 <- 4.0, what this means is you have to have the 2.0 Framework installed to install the 3.0 Framework. You have to have the 3.0 Framework installed to install the 3.5 Framework. And you have to have the 3.5 Framework installed to install the 4.0 Framework.

Now with Win7 having the 2.0, 3.0 and 3.5 Frameworks pre-installed (Vista has the 2.0 and 3.0 preinstalled) it's taking the load off of the end user to install all those frameworks because now the largest of them are already installed and thus they only need to install 1, maybe 2, frameworks to be kept up to date (as of now, 3 years from now this wont be the case, but the newest MS OS will have come out with the 4.0+ pre-installed)

[akhileshbc]

Nope, Framework 4.0 is only Framework 4.0 additions to the Framework stacks.

Everything that runs in the Framework 4 is actually running on the 2.0 Framework, which is why it's a requirement to have the 2.0 Framework installed in the first place. This is also how Framework targetting in VS 2008 and VS 2010 is possible too.

Here's roughly what's going on: 2.0 <- 3.0 <- 3.5 <- 4.0, what this means is you have to have the 2.0 Framework installed to install the 3.0 Framework. You have to have the 3.0 Framework installed to install the 3.5 Framework. And you have to have the 3.5 Framework installed to install the 4.0 Framework.

Now with Win7 having the 2.0, 3.0 and 3.5 Frameworks pre-installed (Vista has the 2.0 and 3.0 preinstalled) it's taking the load off of the end user to install all those frameworks because now the largest of them are already installed and thus they only need to install 1, maybe 2, frameworks to be kept up to date (as of now, 3 years from now this wont be the case, but the newest MS OS will have come out with the 4.0+ pre-installed)

Thanks for clearing me... and for the above information about frameworks...

[JuggaloBrotha]

By "Framework hell" I simply mean the fact that the final users needs to have the right version of the FW installed on his computer to be able to run your application.

Right, because all languages require that their runtime files are on the computer for them to run. This is true of all languages and with .Net those runtime files are all contained in the Framework plus the CLR needs to be installed an be running, but this concept isn't new because Java's been around since '94

Believe me, creating standalone programs that can be run from a pendrive can be done in Delphi without any problems.

If the c/c++ (I forget which one of those Delphi uses on the backend) libraries aren't on the system, then your Delphi app's wont run from a flashdrive either, however the likelihood of those libraries (the runtime files) not being on the system is extremely small (small enough for this to never be an issue) because all 3 major's OS's not only have them, but are made in c/c++ as well. However, I'm trying to get the point across that just because you program in Delphi doesn't mean there's no runtime files that make it happen, it's just that Java and .Net have whole Frameworks instead of a couple small dll's.