3 ms·
>...backwards compatible minor version update >I don't really see how that is at all praiseworthy: C# and Java already did that exact thing. Not quite true fo
by kgeist 5y ago
>...backwards compatible minor version update
>I don't really see how that is at all praiseworthy: C# and Java already did that exact thing.
Not quite true for C#: generics were added in CLR 2.0, which was a major update from CLR 1.1; the runtime was considerably reworked.
- pjmlp 5y agoThe actual history goes a bit differently, they already had generics working, however they weren't stable and management didn't want to delay the initial release. https://mattwarren.org/2018/03/02/How-generics-were-added-to-.NET/ https://mattwarren.org/2018/03/02/How-generics-were-added-to...
- masklinn 5y ago> Not quite true for C#: generics were added in CLR 2.0, which was a major update from CLR 1.1; the runtime was considerably reworked. The two are unrelated.
- noisem4ker 5y agoAre they? C#'s generics required runtime support, unlike Java's, which kept bytecode compatibility through type erasure.