Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #15002 > unrolled thread

Re: eerie Java-BASIC (partially OT)

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.java.programmer

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: eerie Java-BASIC (partially OT) Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-06-02 10:39 -0400
    Re: eerie Java-BASIC (partially OT) Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-06-02 10:40 -0400
      Re: eerie Java-BASIC (partially OT) Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-06-02 09:41 -0700
        Re: eerie Java-BASIC (partially OT) Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2012-06-03 00:44 -0700
          Re: eerie Java-BASIC (partially OT) Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-06-03 09:18 -0400
        Re: eerie Java-BASIC (partially OT) Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-06-03 09:15 -0400
          Re: eerie Java-BASIC (partially OT) BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-03 13:50 -0500
          Re: eerie Java-BASIC (partially OT) Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-06-03 19:29 -0700
            Re: eerie Java-BASIC (partially OT) Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-06-16 23:35 -0400
              Re: eerie Java-BASIC (partially OT) Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-06-16 23:29 -0700
                Re: eerie Java-BASIC (partially OT) Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-06-17 18:33 -0400
    Re: eerie Java-BASIC (partially OT) BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-03 13:26 -0500
      Re: eerie Java-BASIC (partially OT) Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-06-03 12:13 -0700
        Re: eerie Java-BASIC (partially OT) BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-03 15:42 -0500
          Re: eerie Java-BASIC (partially OT) Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-06-03 14:23 -0700
            Re: eerie Java-BASIC (partially OT) Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-06-03 14:25 -0700
            Re: eerie Java-BASIC (partially OT) BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-05 09:22 -0500
              Re: eerie Java-BASIC (partially OT) Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-06-05 09:54 -0700
        Re: eerie Java-BASIC (partially OT) Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-06-16 23:34 -0400
          Re: eerie Java-BASIC (partially OT) "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-24 17:02 -0700
            Re: eerie Java-BASIC (partially OT) Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-06-24 23:09 -0700
      Re: eerie Java-BASIC (partially OT) Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-06-16 23:30 -0400

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#15573

On 06/24/2012 05:02 PM, Mike Schilling wrote:
> "Arne Vajh�j" <arne@vajhoej.dk> wrote in message
> news:4fdd504e$0$287$14726298@news.sunsite.dk...
>>>
>>> They rebranded it and changed certain things, improving them with some
>>> of the non-compliant enhancements they'd given J++, and more.
>>>
>>> So the lineage is direct.
>>
>> I don't think rebranded is accurate.
>>
>> I don't think J++ and .NET share any code and should be considered
>> two very distinct projects.
>>
>> But obviously a MS "Java" and a MS Java-like language like C#
>> must have shared some IP.
>
> I think it's fair to say something like the following:
>
> * The J++ extensions to Java (delegates, events) were on the list of .NET
> runtime features.
> * J# was built on top of the .NET runtime, using ideas but probably little
> code from J++
> * J# was intended as an upgrade path for J++ users, so some attention was
> paid to backward compatibility, but it wasn't completely compatible

C#, .Net and the related languages and tools make a lot of sense in Microsoft 
terms, if you're coming up from, say, a Visual Studio background.

I can't speak for MS, but I tried J++ a little bit when it came out, and I've 
read white papers here and there, and I've spent a little reading time on C# 
and .Net, though I've never used them. .Net and the CLR are what something 
like what anything "JVM-like" would have to be in order to be of use in the 
Microsoft universe.

Part of the falling out between Java (Sun) and J++/C# (MS) was a language 
philosophy holy war. Delegates and later first-class functions are a handy 
distinction, but the Java folks thought them too heavy and redundant given the 
then-recent introduction of nested types which did the job of delegates 
without a whole new mechanism, just classes and interfaces.

Unfortunately for Java, things like first-class functions, primitive objects 
('int' with properties and methods) are popular with programmers and are 
useful to many. They don't seem to have harmed the MS world much, nor have 
unmanaged code and some other things, but then C# is designed for a particular 
environment. Java on purpose is leaner, easier to port between platforms and 
devoid of certain goodies.

-- 
Lew
Honi soit qui mal y pense.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cf/Friz.jpg

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#15347

On 6/3/2012 2:26 PM, BGB wrote:
> On 6/2/2012 9:39 AM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> On 6/2/2012 7:39 AM, Stefan Ram wrote:
>>> BASIC was the first programming language I learned and the
>>> second programming language I was giving classes for (the
>>> first one being Pascal).
>>>
>>> In the next week, I will give my first VB class. So - for
>>> preparation - I did have a look at some VB source code.
>>> And I had an eerie feeling when reading the following part,
>>> thinking: This is actually Java, just with a BASIC syntax!
>>>
>>> If ret.StartsWith("-") Or ret.StartsWith("/") Then Throw New
>>> Exception(...)
>>>
>>> I mean, »String#startsWith« and »throw new Exception ...« are
>>> not part of the classic BASIC, but surely are part of Java!
>>>
>>> (But then, one can also dispute that VB actually /has/ a BASIC
>>> syntax: There are no line numbers, it does not understand
>>> LET, GOSUB nor »PRINT 1,2;3«. And of course, there is no
>>> »MAT«, »DEF FN...« or READ/DATA. So it's Java with a made-up
>>> syntax, which possibly partially resembles BASIC.)
>>>
>>> Well, Java surely is influential. Maybe the
>>> programming-language landscape will slowly converge to some
>>> set of common features/classes and syntax.
>>
>> If you with VB means VB.NET then you are absolutely correct.
>>
>> VB.NET is C# with VB syntax and C# is close to a superset of Java.
>
> generally, yes.
>
> but, a person could try to argue that they are "totally different", say
> because of using "namespace" and "using" rather than "package" and
> "import", and ":" in class definitions instead of "extends" and
> "implements", ...
>
> however, these are likely minor differences (many are primarily
> cosmetic, and some others could conceivably be made to work on the JVM
> as well).

The other way is easier. J# proved that.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.java.programmer

csiph-web