Re: The future of .NET 2.0

I don't kown what exactly it adds (the paper mentions "low level constructs"
but my guess would be it's a bit more than just syntactic suggar but likely
"real" additional low level features aimed at writing something like an
OS)..

That said I prettry agreee that it doesn't really matter. Whatever the
distance between the current framework and what they used is, the whole
project is likely an interesting clue anyway...
--
Patrice

"Randolpho" <randolpho@xxxxxxxxx> a écrit dans le message de news:
1147699813.523965.259420@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
CMM opined:
Yet, we don't have 10,000 developers at my company, but WE'RE expected to
throw it away? No, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. The
.NET *IDE* should be 100% managed IMO.... until then .NET is NOT a "real"
platform in my book (as much as I love it).

Of course you're not expected to throw away your legacy code!!!! Why do
you think Microsoft goes to so much trouble to ensure that .NET can
interoperate with legacy code? So you *don't* have to throw away your
old stuff! .NET is for new applications, modifications, and upgrades.
Win32 *still* exists, and will continue to do so in some form or other
for many years. Ditto MFC. Unfortunately.... ;)

Patrice opined:
According to "An Overview of the Singularity Project" at
http://research.microsoft.com/os/singularity, it is actually written using
Sing# (a language derived from a language that is derived from C#).

A recent MSDN Magazine articles says it is written using C# but it looks
like a simplification...

Yes, it's written in Sing#, and did you notice what Sing# added to C#?
Syntactic sugar to embed asynchronous message passing into the
language. That's pretty much it -- other than the contract stuff, Sing#
looks like C#. It's true that Singularity probably doesn't use much of
the API associated with the .NET framework, since it's all kernel code,
but it *does* compile to the same MSIL to which every other .NET
language compiles. It uses properties, attributes, delegates... it is
100% .NET.

Well, ok, it's 99.9% .NET, since there's some unsafe C++ and ASM code
in there, but you get the point, I hope.



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: "Ravenscar-like" profile for C/C++
    ... > ADA Ravenscar is a restricted subset of the ADA language that has been ... The whole language is designed for maximum run-time/space ... "C-style operations with low level stuff ... C-style array the C++ high level sort(template) is applied. ...
    (comp.lang.c)
  • Re: "Ravenscar-like" profile for C/C++
    ... > ADA Ravenscar is a restricted subset of the ADA language that has been ... The whole language is designed for maximum run-time/space ... "C-style operations with low level stuff ... C-style array the C++ high level sort(template) is applied. ...
    (comp.lang.cpp)
  • Re: too much OOP ?
    ... You claimed SQL being at a extremly low level of abstraction. ... I said that designing it in terms of records is low level. ... then that language would be low-level. ... complexity of the language constructs. ...
    (comp.object)
  • Re: Whats lacking: a good intermediate form
    ... too low level, ... which are geared to supporting particular language components. ... may or may not result in new IRs, ... level to language-agnostic and high level, ...
    (comp.lang.misc)
  • Re: Java or C++?
    ... > One approach, taken by Oberon, is to isolate the low level code in ... > "For system-level programming, Oberon offers the pseudo module SYSTEM, ... The C language also has that concept. ... inherently unsafe by their being compiled with the command "cc". ...
    (comp.programming)