5 ms·

Its ecosystem isn’t. C# will never get accepted as an open source product. It only has open source code, it’s not actually ‘open-source.’ Compare it with Typesc

by deno 10y ago

Its ecosystem isn’t. C# will never get accepted as an open source product. It only has open source code, it’s not actually ‘open-source.’ Compare it with Typescript, which—despite originating from Microsoft—is a truly open project, and getting love left and right. C# might be better than Java/JVM, but it’s not better enough. The culture/ecosystem barrier is so high that C# would have to be miles ahead, technically superior in every way, to overcome it. I do hate the “worse is better” adage, but there’s no mistaking it, it applies here. It’s just too little, too late. But Typescript is awesome, keep it up. Ironically, Google’s competitor (Closure Compiler) has actually been unsuccessful for similar reasons. To this date its main repo is just a clone of the internal master. For whatever reason they’ve never attempted to rebase on open-source release.

baq 10y ago
i have a hard time with this argument. on one hand what you say is true: C# is a strictly smaller community than java. OTOH that's true of pretty much any language, and yet python, ruby, elixir, swift, golang, etc. communities are healthy and vibrant. if what you really mean is 'java people won't switch to C# anyway', then i agree, but C# isn't a really a language for them. it's a language for people who don't like and/or aren't forced to use java by their employers.
- dragonwriter 10y ago
  As if C# were any less driven by PHB-dictated internal enterprise mandates than Java is.
- deno 10y ago
  People who aren’t forced to use Java will choose Scala or other JVM langs, like Kotlin, Ceylon (a favorite of mine) or even Clojure. C# the language is not exactly that exciting. I get it, it looks attractive next to Java, but it’s still a verbose, corporate-first, sort of thing. If anything, F# is much more competitive. Too bad it’s on CLR.
  - bradford 10y ago
    [disclaimer, also MS employee]. This has already devolved into opinion territory but I don't think you're giving C# enough credit. I picked up F# relatively early in it's lifetime (2006ish?), back then there were many language features in F# that you just couldn't do in C#. The gap closed a lot when C# got LINQ, generics, and lambda/first-class functions (these are relatively old language features by now). If I want to write in an quasi-functional-programming language style I can do it without having the language get in my way. I certainly wouldn't call it a "verbose, corporate-first" language, although the fact that it can be used for that is a bonus.
    - deno 10y ago
      Don’t forget Rx. Not exactly language feature, but certainly a great contribution to come out of C#/.NET. And who knows if it would have happened without LINQ. I like the language. Just not enough to use it over JVM. And I think most people feel the same way.
- pjmlp 10y ago
  That is not quite true. Many of us doing enterprise consulting do jump between Java and .NET projects all the time. Sometimes even doing mixed projects, like the UI in .NET and the backend in Java.
  - baq 10y ago
    i'll grant you that after a very brief consideration > UI in .NET and the backend in Java. makes a lot of sense.
    - pjmlp 10y ago
      The problem with native desktop Java applications that although Swing is quite powerful, it requires developers to go through books like "Filthy Rich Clients"[0] to really take advantage of it. Which very few do. To this day I still meet developers that aren't aware how to change the default L&F to native widgets, for example. Whereas Windows Forms and WPF already provide a much easier out of the box experience, and have tooling like Blend available. I am curious what the JavaFX sessions at JavaONE will cover. [0] http://filthyrichclients.org/ http://filthyrichclients.org/
whateverdudes 10y ago
What do you mean by it not being open source? The core CLR is MIT licensed and the compiler is Apache licensed. This sounds like fud to me.
- deno 10y ago
  I have no issue with the license.
  - whateverdudes 10y ago
    So it's maintained in the open on GitHub, it's technically open source in terms of licensing. Yet you claim it's not really open source. Care to clarify?
    - deno 10y ago
      It’s technically open-source, that’s the point. There’s more to open-source than license. Sorry but there’s no way for me to clarify without just repeating my original comment.
      - whateverdudes 10y ago
        Your original comments mostly contained your personal opinions, not actual facts. The fact is that it is open source and you are FUDing.
        deno 10y ago
        > Your original comments mostly contained your personal opinions I never tried to pass it as anything else.
      - Karunamon 10y ago
        There’s more to open-source than license. Such as? You seem to have a mental model of things that make a project objectively open source, that don't include the license. I'd be curious what those things are.
qwertyuiop924 10y ago
That's not what Worse Is Better means. Did you read the Gabriel paper? /nitpick
- deno 10y ago
  I got it from Unix’s haters handbook.
  - qwertyuiop924 10y ago
    Well, you clearly didn't get the full definition. Go read Lisp: The Good News, The Bad News, And How To Win Big

by deno 10y ago

baq 10y ago

i have a hard time with this argument. on one hand what you say is true: C# is a strictly smaller community than java. OTOH that's true of pretty much any language, and yet python, ruby, elixir, swift, golang, etc. communities are healthy and vibrant. if what you really mean is 'java people won't switch to C# anyway', then i agree, but C# isn't a really a language for them. it's a language for people who don't like and/or aren't forced to use java by their employers.

dragonwriter 10y ago
As if C# were any less driven by PHB-dictated internal enterprise mandates than Java is.
deno 10y ago
People who aren’t forced to use Java will choose Scala or other JVM langs, like Kotlin, Ceylon (a favorite of mine) or even Clojure. C# the language is not exactly that exciting. I get it, it looks attractive next to Java, but it’s still a verbose, corporate-first, sort of thing. If anything, F# is much more competitive. Too bad it’s on CLR.
- bradford 10y ago
  [disclaimer, also MS employee]. This has already devolved into opinion territory but I don't think you're giving C# enough credit. I picked up F# relatively early in it's lifetime (2006ish?), back then there were many language features in F# that you just couldn't do in C#. The gap closed a lot when C# got LINQ, generics, and lambda/first-class functions (these are relatively old language features by now). If I want to write in an quasi-functional-programming language style I can do it without having the language get in my way. I certainly wouldn't call it a "verbose, corporate-first" language, although the fact that it can be used for that is a bonus.
  - deno 10y ago
    Don’t forget Rx. Not exactly language feature, but certainly a great contribution to come out of C#/.NET. And who knows if it would have happened without LINQ. I like the language. Just not enough to use it over JVM. And I think most people feel the same way.
pjmlp 10y ago
That is not quite true. Many of us doing enterprise consulting do jump between Java and .NET projects all the time. Sometimes even doing mixed projects, like the UI in .NET and the backend in Java.
- baq 10y ago
  i'll grant you that after a very brief consideration > UI in .NET and the backend in Java. makes a lot of sense.
  - pjmlp 10y ago
    The problem with native desktop Java applications that although Swing is quite powerful, it requires developers to go through books like "Filthy Rich Clients"[0] to really take advantage of it. Which very few do. To this day I still meet developers that aren't aware how to change the default L&F to native widgets, for example. Whereas Windows Forms and WPF already provide a much easier out of the box experience, and have tooling like Blend available. I am curious what the JavaFX sessions at JavaONE will cover. [0] http://filthyrichclients.org/ http://filthyrichclients.org/

whateverdudes 10y ago

What do you mean by it not being open source? The core CLR is MIT licensed and the compiler is Apache licensed. This sounds like fud to me.

deno 10y ago
I have no issue with the license.
- whateverdudes 10y ago
  So it's maintained in the open on GitHub, it's technically open source in terms of licensing. Yet you claim it's not really open source. Care to clarify?
  - deno 10y ago
    It’s technically open-source, that’s the point. There’s more to open-source than license. Sorry but there’s no way for me to clarify without just repeating my original comment.
    - whateverdudes 10y ago
      Your original comments mostly contained your personal opinions, not actual facts. The fact is that it is open source and you are FUDing.
      - deno 10y ago
        > Your original comments mostly contained your personal opinions I never tried to pass it as anything else.
    - Karunamon 10y ago
      There’s more to open-source than license. Such as? You seem to have a mental model of things that make a project objectively open source, that don't include the license. I'd be curious what those things are.

qwertyuiop924 10y ago

That's not what Worse Is Better means. Did you read the Gabriel paper? /nitpick

deno 10y ago
I got it from Unix’s haters handbook.
- qwertyuiop924 10y ago
  Well, you clearly didn't get the full definition. Go read Lisp: The Good News, The Bad News, And How To Win Big