5 ms·
Indeed. I was surprised by this statement in the article: "Contrast this with the most prominent competing desktop platform, the Microsoft .NET framework and C#
by mcculley 16y ago
Indeed. I was surprised by this statement in the article: "Contrast this with the most prominent competing desktop platform, the Microsoft .NET framework and C# language on Windows, where memory-managed code is the default and everything else is considered risky, literally being denoted with the "unsafe" keyword in the source code."
I've been doing development with .NET/C# for the first time for the last six months and I was surprised to see that the default mode for development is unmanaged. Do any big apps actually use managed mode?
- tpz 16y agoI was surprised to see that the default mode for development is unmanaged. I find myself wondering what you mean by "default mode", as during the last 9 solid years of .net development work I have found it to very much be the case that managed is the default. Can you clarify your statement?
- mcculley 16y agoYes, I wasn't at all clear. What I meant was that sitting down as a newbie to Visual Studio, I was surprised at how many of the project types created by doing "File->New Project..." resulted in unmanaged .EXE targets. But I could have been misinterpreting that.
- Tamerlin 16y agoThat probably means an executable rather than an assembly, but the underlying execution platform is still the .NET virtual machine, and all that goes with the VM, including managed memory. I could be mistaken, of course; I'm not an expert at .NET yet.
- altano 16y agoWhen you first run Visual Studio you specify what default environment you'd prefer... c++, .net, etc. Perhaps you chose c++?