5 ms·

I keep hearing how .NET and C# are supposed to be pretty great these days. C# often gets credit for popularizing async/await, although I don't actually know if

I keep hearing how .NET and C# are supposed to be pretty great these days. C# often gets credit for popularizing async/await, although I don't actually know if that's true. Based on that, and the point you made, I'd definitely go the .NET/C# route if I ever ended up in the unfortunate position of having to develop software for Windows. Barring of course some reason that it had to be written in Go or something else.

jasonjei 10y ago
WTL is also great if you want or need something that doesn't use .NET. Building GUI apps doesn't suck with WTL. What I would like to see is an example of an app where I can build an app using both WTL/C++ and have Go code with channel support...
addicted 10y ago
I don't see why someone wouldn't use C#/.Net to build a native Windows app. It's open source, and supported by Microsoft, the makers of Windows as the primary Windows app environment. One reason would be if you're trying to build a node based app which you would like to use across other platforms.
- maxxxxx 10y ago
  The problem isn't C#/.NET but what GUI toolkit do you use? Winforms, WPF, UWP and others are either in maintenance mode or incomplete. The only complete toolkit is Win32 which brings you back to C/C++.
  - 0xffff2 10y ago
    Isn't Win32 basically in the same maintenance mode as WinForms? WinForms is mostly just a thin wrapper around Win32 anyway.
    - maxxxxx 10y ago
      Pretty much everything new first gets exposed through Win32 or some COM interface like DirectX.
  - pjmlp 10y ago
    All new APIs since Windows 8 are now COM based, yeah it is still Win32, but I guess it is just following their original idea for .NET (COM+ Runtime and not the CLR). In some future version of Windows, when UWP with its COM foundation becomes prevalent, they can ripoff all the Win32 APIs that aren't required to support WinRT. Just like Apple has done with Carbon, Quicktime and many others.
    - maxxxxx 10y ago
      We will see how UWP works out. I wouldn't be too surprised if they changed their strategy in the next few years to come out with something different. That seems to be the Microsoft tradition. As soon as something starts working it gets replaced by something else. The only constants are COM and Win32.
      - pjmlp 10y ago
        Sure, however I am with high hopes with WinRT, as it is what .NET should have originally been designed instead of the CLR detour. If you look at what Delphi, Modula-3, Ada, Component Pascal, Oberon variants, Eiffel were already offering before Java took off. > As soon as something starts working it gets replaced by something else. Just like everyone else. I can hardly think of any platform owner that has kept their APIs stable. Not that you are not right to complain, I just get the impression many tend to forget about the other vendors similar practices.
        titanix2 10y ago
        I find this coming back from CLR to COM sad because the CLR support another very good language (F#) which isn't in WinRT and also because the CLR is going really multiplatform with .net core. Also too bad Microsoft didn't pursed a multiplatform framework like Silverlight and go with a solution that didn't even run on its own OSes (previous version of Windows).
mb_72 10y ago
Why 'unfortunate'? What is 'unfortunate' is developers having prejudice against any OS / IDE / language / etc; it restricts your creation of solutions for the problems that need to be solved. Keeping up with developments across all platforms - like the fact these days you can use C# for non-Windows targets- helps us be well-rounded and capable developers.
- icebraining 10y ago
  It's only prejudice if it's not based on direct experience. Many of us would rather avoid going back to Windows at all.
  - pjmlp 10y ago
    After several years using GNU/Linux I have happily returned. Windows and Mac OS X are the only sane alternatives for developers that care about desktop applications and developer friendly toolchains. Same applies to iOS, Android and WP. The other alternatives feel like only the CLI and daemons matter, stuck in a PDP-11 view of the world. Then again, NeXT was the only UNIX based OS with an alternative culture regarding developers tools and UX. KDE is the only environment that can match in terms of tooling and UX, yet it is lacking some serious love nowadays. I want my developer and user experience to be a Xerox Star and not a PDP-11.
    - idobai 10y ago
      > KDE is the only environment that can match in terms of tooling and UX, yet it is lacking some serious love nowadays. KDE? Seriously? It's one of the worst DEs on linux. Any DE which isn't based on gnome is just cheap nowadays.
      - pjmlp 10y ago
        So which other DE on GNU/Linux does provide the same tooling and platform abstractions as KDevelop/Qt Creator do? GNOME has a very nice HIG from UX point of view, but it is stuck in C + POSIX as technology stack in what concerns developer experience. Vala is still not there and I don't believe in JavaScript for native UIs.

jasonjei 10y ago

WTL is also great if you want or need something that doesn't use .NET. Building GUI apps doesn't suck with WTL. What I would like to see is an example of an app where I can build an app using both WTL/C++ and have Go code with channel support...

addicted 10y ago

I don't see why someone wouldn't use C#/.Net to build a native Windows app. It's open source, and supported by Microsoft, the makers of Windows as the primary Windows app environment. One reason would be if you're trying to build a node based app which you would like to use across other platforms.

maxxxxx 10y ago
The problem isn't C#/.NET but what GUI toolkit do you use? Winforms, WPF, UWP and others are either in maintenance mode or incomplete. The only complete toolkit is Win32 which brings you back to C/C++.
- 0xffff2 10y ago
  Isn't Win32 basically in the same maintenance mode as WinForms? WinForms is mostly just a thin wrapper around Win32 anyway.
  - maxxxxx 10y ago
    Pretty much everything new first gets exposed through Win32 or some COM interface like DirectX.
- pjmlp 10y ago
  All new APIs since Windows 8 are now COM based, yeah it is still Win32, but I guess it is just following their original idea for .NET (COM+ Runtime and not the CLR). In some future version of Windows, when UWP with its COM foundation becomes prevalent, they can ripoff all the Win32 APIs that aren't required to support WinRT. Just like Apple has done with Carbon, Quicktime and many others.
  - maxxxxx 10y ago
    We will see how UWP works out. I wouldn't be too surprised if they changed their strategy in the next few years to come out with something different. That seems to be the Microsoft tradition. As soon as something starts working it gets replaced by something else. The only constants are COM and Win32.
    - pjmlp 10y ago
      Sure, however I am with high hopes with WinRT, as it is what .NET should have originally been designed instead of the CLR detour. If you look at what Delphi, Modula-3, Ada, Component Pascal, Oberon variants, Eiffel were already offering before Java took off. > As soon as something starts working it gets replaced by something else. Just like everyone else. I can hardly think of any platform owner that has kept their APIs stable. Not that you are not right to complain, I just get the impression many tend to forget about the other vendors similar practices.
      - titanix2 10y ago
        I find this coming back from CLR to COM sad because the CLR support another very good language (F#) which isn't in WinRT and also because the CLR is going really multiplatform with .net core. Also too bad Microsoft didn't pursed a multiplatform framework like Silverlight and go with a solution that didn't even run on its own OSes (previous version of Windows).

mb_72 10y ago

Why 'unfortunate'? What is 'unfortunate' is developers having prejudice against any OS / IDE / language / etc; it restricts your creation of solutions for the problems that need to be solved. Keeping up with developments across all platforms - like the fact these days you can use C# for non-Windows targets- helps us be well-rounded and capable developers.

icebraining 10y ago
It's only prejudice if it's not based on direct experience. Many of us would rather avoid going back to Windows at all.
- pjmlp 10y ago
  After several years using GNU/Linux I have happily returned. Windows and Mac OS X are the only sane alternatives for developers that care about desktop applications and developer friendly toolchains. Same applies to iOS, Android and WP. The other alternatives feel like only the CLI and daemons matter, stuck in a PDP-11 view of the world. Then again, NeXT was the only UNIX based OS with an alternative culture regarding developers tools and UX. KDE is the only environment that can match in terms of tooling and UX, yet it is lacking some serious love nowadays. I want my developer and user experience to be a Xerox Star and not a PDP-11.
  - idobai 10y ago
    > KDE is the only environment that can match in terms of tooling and UX, yet it is lacking some serious love nowadays. KDE? Seriously? It's one of the worst DEs on linux. Any DE which isn't based on gnome is just cheap nowadays.
    - pjmlp 10y ago
      So which other DE on GNU/Linux does provide the same tooling and platform abstractions as KDevelop/Qt Creator do? GNOME has a very nice HIG from UX point of view, but it is stuck in C + POSIX as technology stack in what concerns developer experience. Vala is still not there and I don't believe in JavaScript for native UIs.