Geeks With Blogs
Michael Flanakin's blog Food for thought...

Next up, Löwy Guest Op Generates More Response by Robert Teixeira of Tampa.

Robert, like me, seems to like a lot of Juval's input into the community, but I think he's made the same critical mistake that a lot of people made after reading Juval's article. I've talked to Juval and a number of Microsoft employees about this topic and I believe that I have a firm grip on what Juval was talking about.

First of all, the Microsoft teams that determine what features will be added in the next version of each of the languages have vastly different ideas of where their languages should go. For instance, most VB developers want the language (and Visual Studio) to go back to the RAD-focused nature that it started out with. I don't think anyone is arguing that. Well, I believe that at the time of the article's writing, the VB team determined that they didn't want some of those upcoming features (like generics) in the language; instead, they opted for other features, like edit-and-continue. On the other hand, the C# team was the opposite - generics was at the top and edit-and-continue at the bottom. It was only after this decision that the VB community raised hell about the options that were chosen to be part of the next version, so the VB team got back together to reorganize their list.

To go a step beyond the language, however, we all need to recognize the fact that what Juval was discussing was the future of Visual Studio. Anyone that's played in both environments knows that there is a difference between the UIs. While these differences are very small, they will be growing in the future. For instance, as far as I understand it, edit-and-continue will not be a part of the VS C# editor. I may be wrong on this, but I think that's correct (as of now). These things change all the time, tho, so who really knows.

I agree with Juval in saying that developers need to pick a language. I feel that everyone should be flexible enough to transition, but the languages are headed in 2 different directions. One thing that can show this is the X# research that Microsoft has been involved in. While it is important for Microsoft to keep the languages on a similar .NET path, they have their own purposes and should travel their own roads. If they were intended to both have the same exact features, then what would be the point in having 2 separate languages? Think about it.

Posted on Saturday, January 24, 2004 9:53 AM .NET , Development , last2 | Back to top

Copyright © Michael Flanakin | Powered by: