C#,did it succeed?

Well, I''m sure I dont read as much about these things as I should do to keep up with them, but I only heard about it by accident when I saw it somewhere, and even then I thought it was just another way of writing C++. Even now when I finally know it''s something else... I still dont know exactly what it is, why it''s different from C/C++, or where it came from.


- Ashley Oliver
Lead Programmer, Interplanitary Productions

its too early to say.

I think it''ll take off later this year if anything, cos that''s when DX9 is likely to release - which was designed with managed code in mind, and C# is MS''s ''perfect'' managed code language.

I did see a thread somewhere started by Tim Sweeney (unreal fame) saying he''d looked into using C# for games - dont remember what the outcome was though.

Jack;

DirectX 4 VB: All you need for multimedia programming in Visual Basic
Formula 1 Championship Manager, My Game Project.

We haven''t reached the end of the hype cycle yet. Give it a year to see where it shines and two years to see if was really a success.

---

University is a fountain of knowledge, and students go there to drink.

quote:

---

I still dont know exactly what it is, why it''s different from C/C++

---

it''s far more like Java imo - i''m guessing it''s just MS''s equivelent, given they needed a new language for .Net, and they got into a bit of trouble of Sun over their implementation of Java...

Jack

DirectX 4 VB: All you need for multimedia programming in Visual Basic
Formula 1 Championship Manager, My Game Project.

Well I quite like it if nothing else

Dont know what to say either.I am using C++ anyway but after buying a book for C#,"Teach Yourself C# In 21 Days",I must say that it looks promising and far easier than C++.Thinking on starting using C# than C++ but I dont know.Would you recommend it in the long run.Of course I am going to use C# for 3D programming as I do now with C++.

As a language itself I don''t like it, because it forces OO on the user (yea, I''m still a C programmer), and you have useless casts to and from class Object (but that should change soon once they implement GENERICS in C#, once that occurs, I will seriously consider using C# for my games). What I do like about it though is how easy the .Net framework classes make certain things, and that its still really easy to call C/C++ code from C# when performance is critical.

Until it truly supports multiple platforms, I''m not interested. (Go Mono!)

AFAIK, Mono still hasn''t implement the entire .NET framework. I think WinForms is missing, which is why I couldn''t get any GUI stuff to work. Can''t wait for the day its completed though....

Well, instead of bitching about it, you could always contribute.

---

Faith. n. Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel. -- Ambrose Bierce

However do you think that jumping from C++ to C# for developing games and 3D Engines is a good idea?

I went to a presentation on .NET and C# by Microsoft sometime last week ... and I can't say that I'm impressed. In fact I'm fairly well revolted. My resons are simple:

1. I'm guilty of that C++ and C bastardized mix we all know and some of us love I don't like how OOP is so forced on me. I never liked MFC THAT much, I use it for most of my projects but I strip it down as much as possible (to get the small benefit that I think it offers me) and most of the code I implement is Win32 API style code.

2. C# is not cross platform. While I use MFC and Win32, there are large hunks of code I like to keep somewhat "pure" so that I can use them on another platform in case I have the inkling to do so. Note that I don't do much crossplatform work - I just know that someday I WILL and I WILL regret if I don't prepare somewhat for it.

3. C# is Microsoft. Yeah I know, I write for windows, I use MFC, I use Win32 API. It's different to me somehow. C++ and C are beautiful to me. In some regards I like C++ more but as I said above I mix and bastardize them far too much.. it's not a good thing but that's how it is. C++ and C are tried and tested. They have evolved to a pinnacle of power, versatility, diversity. The languages are so well supported. They are so well implemented. They are so popular that even C# looks, feels, and in many cases acts like C++. To me, this is just a testament on how powerful and versatile C++ is: not just because C# was designed to be easy to learn with it's C++ style, but because C# is designed the way it is because (in my opinion) the designers weren't too dumb to realize what a superior syntax C++ has. (sorry I'm biased. There are a good number of languages I like and use, but not for release app development)

4. C# is NEW. This sort of throws back to #3 a bit. C# probably has some serious problems that we just don't see yet because it hasn't been used widely. It's also probably slower and clumsier in some ways. (Again, I do NOT know because I'm not farmiliar as I'd like to be in order to make these comments)

5. (added later, I forgot to write this) C# is another Java to me. I like Java, when it's appropriate. I never really learned Java that well however. I also really dislike how C# seems to take alot of low level power away from you. Without low level power, there is no optimization - without proper optimization, there is no innvation in the game community.

I'm not sure I like the JIT compile stuff. Hmm. Don't know how it works well enough to talk about it, again. I've heard some people say that you can bypass it however.

I don't know. Then I'm biased. Soon enough I'm going to buy a introductory C# book and learn it just because I might need it for a job someday. However, I doubt VERY much that I will ever love it and use it voluntarily.

[edited by - Xori on October 27, 2002 9:12:48 PM]

quote:

---

Original post by Antony52
I am sure that all of you have heard about C# and many might have used it.What I really want to know is whether it succeed in popularity.Has anyone read anything about the C#''s future until now?
As many of you might have asked(the search is not working yet)I am asking also:Is C# going to be used from the game community and from the companies to build 3D Engines with?
I am waiting for your opinion.

---

For databases yes it will probably be popular, but I doubt any serious game developers are going to switch to C#, C or C++ are still faster. In short it''s just a another attempt to unseat Java.

quote:

---

but I doubt any serious game developers are going to switch to C#, C or C++ are still faster

---

Thats one of these statements that are so braindead that I wonder people writing this still breathe.

See, not all games are time critical. And even in these time critical games, a lot of things are not time critical. Thats the reason some games use scripting languages internally.

While I am stil undecided whether C# (and generics come, btw., earliest in around 2 years with .NET 2) is suitable for the core of 3d engines (though MS says so - especially due to the current weakness with floating point operations), there is nothing that would stop you from using C# above the engine layer. A 3d engine written in managed/unmanaged C++ would allow full native integration into the runtime - and allow you all sort of tricks.

So yes, C# is fully suitable for serious game development - just not necessarily for 3d engines and physics simulations, for which I hope libraries will appear. Then agian, this is mostly the current "problem" with flkoar performance of the runtime (not optimising this fully in the JIT compiler).

Regards

Thomas Tomiczek
THONA Consulting Ltd.
(Microsoft MVP C#/.NET)

quote:

---

(and generics come, btw., earliest in around 2 years with .NET 2)

---

That really, really sucks. Guess I''ll be sticking with C++ for now then :/

(OpenGL looked like a pain in the arse to use with C# anyway)

quote:

---

Original post by Xori
3. C# is Microsoft.

---

In and of itself, that is not a reason to dislike something.

quote:

---

C++ and C are beautiful to me.

---

Yikes!

quote:

---

The languages are so well supported. They are so well implemented.

---

Are you talking about the same C++ that was standardised 4 years ago and has only just got a fully-compliant compiler?

quote:

---

C# is designed the way it is because (in my opinion) the designers weren''t too dumb to realize what a superior syntax C++ has.

---

Superior to what?

quote:

---

4. C# is NEW. This sort of throws back to #3 a bit. C# probably has some serious problems that we just don''t see yet because it hasn''t been used widely. It''s also probably slower and clumsier in some ways. (Again, I do NOT know because I''m not farmiliar as I''d like to be in order to make these comments)

---

So you don''t actually know whether any of what you''re saying is true? I smell bigoted nonsense.

quote:

---

Without low level power, there is no optimization

---

Don''t be silly.

quote:

---

I''m not sure I like the JIT compile stuff. Hmm. Don''t know how it works well enough to talk about it, again. I''ve heard some people say that you can bypass it however.

---

If you don''t actually know anything about it, what do you think you are bringing to the discussion by even mentioning it?

quote:

---

Original post by Arild Fines
Well, instead of bitching about it, you could always contribute.

---

If I was good enough, sure.

Life Sucks.
I spent the last 3 years of my life on C and C++,
and now this C#.
MS really pisses me off.
How can anyone master a language if they keep
pushing new ones.
I am glad that MFC crap never got anywhere
( my apoligies to those who life from it ).
Any day now, I might just get pissed,
and pop out my linux gear.


Angry Programmer

quote:

---

Original post by SomeDudeInUSA
I am glad that MFC crap never got anywhere

---

Huh?

---

Faith. n. Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel. -- Ambrose Bierce