Im going to be making a site, soon. What language do you think i should learn?

[quote author=David link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=0#msg51852 date=1080327914]
Im going to be making a site, soon. What language do you think i should learn?
[/quote]

HTML! Possibly PHP/JAVA? Those are my preferred CGI languages, but some might also suggest ASP(.NET). You could also use PERL if you like.

Addition: If you plan on becoming a professional web developer I would recommend ASP, or Java.

[quote author=David link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=0#msg51852 date=1080327914]
Im going to be making a site, soon. What language do you think i should learn?
[/quote]

It really depends on what you want to do. If you're just learning to learn, then I would go with a mix of HTML and JavaScript. Remember -- they are for different things; HTML describes the format of some information, whereas Javascript (and other programming languages) manipulates the data or its format (appearance).

If you want to get into some hardcore stuff, I would recommend Java or ASP.NET. The .NET Platform might be better if you want to transition into Windows user interface development, but now that I have a good feel for programming, I think I could handle the Java Swing (the visual user interface) platform too.

If you learn Javascript, that knowledge can be immediately applied to ASP.

I've been learning PHP for quite some time, and find it very useful. PHP also has a ton of pre-made sites for free (ex PHPNuke), and it very widely supported (which is good, because finding errors are a pain). Javascript seems to have capabilities to add nice features to sites too. I wouldn't know about java/asp(.net).

At very least, know HTML, and you can decide what language you want to learn from there.

If you are going to write static pages, you only need know XHTML and CSS.

If you are going to write dynamic pages, you may need either, or both of, a server-side and client-side technology.

On the client, the primary choice is JavaScript, which Microsoft labels JScript though it is very compatible if not 100%, with JavaScript. There are other client-side (the browser is the client) extensions such as Netscape's, but they are not widely supported. JavaScript is supported by all major market-share browsers.

On the server side, you have Java, the most portable choice. Portable means you can take your website source code and install it on other web server brands (Apache, Tomcat, WebSphere, IIS, etc) and it should run without modification, or much modification.

Non-portable choices are also popular, if you always will be running your code on IIS, you can choose ASP, ASP.NET, from Microsoft, or a dozen other languages implemented for IIS.

For most choices, the language is not a limiting factor anymore. Technology is layered such that languages themselves are somewhat portable these days.

HTML then PHP :)

As you can see it varies a bit, if you want to make a career out of it, I'd listen to Grok, if you just want to do stuff at home, I'd probably go with PHP.

Why can't you make a career out of PHP?

[quote author=hismajesty link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=0#msg52049 date=1080397068]
Why can't you make a career out of PHP?
[/quote]
I'm not necessarily saying you can't, but IT professionals are looking for ASP.NET I think, Grok would know. PHP just doesn't seem like the right language to make a career out of. I could be wrong though.

For clarity as to what XHTML is (what Grok referenced), because if you haven't learned HTML yet, you might not know:

HTML is a set of tags that describe how a document is formatted. For instance, if you want to make text bold, you can:

[code]
This is my <b>bold</b> text.
[/code]
Result:
This is my bold text.

There are some instances where you don't have to put the second tag -- the one that tells the client that you're done formatting something a specific way. A few that come to mind are:

[code]
<br>

<img src="http://www.mysite.com/myimg.jpg">

<li>List item 1
<li>List item 2
[/code]

You can also specify the selected attribute for a Drop-down-list item without setting anything -- just add in "selected" and it will be.

With XML, you can use special tags similar to with HTML, except that the tags simply contain data, not format it. Because it keeps data structured in a specific way, there are extra rules to follow -- such as all tags need to be closed, tag attributes (such as "selected") always have a value (even if it's just "true" or "false"), etc.

XHTML is a movement to apply XML rules to HTML, so that all of the benefits of data-reading and writing that work for XML can apply to HTML (this sounds obscure, but it's really a huge boon for web developers -- now that I've learned it, I know). Aside from other bonuses, it is the most universally-compatible HTML to be found. The above code could be done like this:

[code]
<br></br> --or more commonly-- <br />

<img src="http://www.mysite.com/myimg.jpg"></img> --or more commonly-- <img src="..." />

<li>List item 1</li>
<li>List item 2</li>
[/code]

Cheers

If XML's relationship to HTML is confusing, this might clear it up.

HTML used to be written in a "language descriptor" named SGML. But SGML was really hard to learn or use by anyone. So basically, nobody did. Browser vendors did whatever they wanted with HTML and ignored all the rules that SGML imposed.

XML was created as a much simpler SGML, and with the simplicity came power. Seems odd, but that's what happened. The tool to write languages was now accessible to the mass public (programmers). The mass public loved it and adopted it for all things markup!

HTML 4.01 "is written in" XML. Remember XML is a language, too, not just an application itself.

After HTML was rewritten in XML, a lot of the "garbage" that browser vendors had added was marked for removal in the next version. This removal is "deprecation" and you see that word a lot in 4.01. All deprecated items are not available in the next version of HTML, which was XHTML 1.0.

XHTML 1.0 imposes the XML rules to make HTML good again, and some new features. All the "eye candy" of HTML has been ripped out and moved into styles. Those styles are written in a format called Cascading Style Sheets, or CSS.

CSS(1), CSS-P, CSS2, and CSS3 are the different versions. Most popular GUI browsers have nearly full support for CSS-P, and a few have nearly full support for CSS2.

Why all this? To make the web an information plethora, but available to all sorts of devices. Not just PC monitors (screens), audio devices, tactile devices, printers, and others. CSS2 gives the power to prepare HTML page content for different devices.

XML is so overused.

Just wait till you're in business and get into these massive time-wasting arguments over data formats for exchanging between sites. XML instantly solves those problems and kills 99% of arguments, saving tons of money and increasing productivity. Companies can concentrate on doing business, and not designing it all the time.

[quote author=Grok link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=0#msg52102 date=1080425733]
Just wait till you're in business and get into these massive time-wasting arguments over data formats for exchanging between sites. XML instantly solves those problems and kills 99% of arguments, saving tons of money and increasing productivity. Companies can concentrate on doing business, and not designing it all the time.
[/quote]

My clan used XML in the most recent implementation of our website. Here's the beginning snippet:

[code]
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?>
<Rules xmlns="http://www.clan-aoa.org/Schemas/Rules.xsd">
<Section SNum="1" Name="General">
<Part Number="1" Name="Cheating">The Angels of Armageddon do not believe in cheating under any circumstances. That means that NO member of AoA will use cheats, or map hacks, or any other unsportman-like advantage during a game. This is the number ONE rule of AoA, if you do not think you can follow this rule, then there is no need to read further.</Part>
<Part Number="2" Name="Conduct">The Angels of Armageddon treats other members of AoA FAIRLY, RESPECTFULLY, and BROTHERLY. This means that if you are in a game with any other AoA member there are no backstabbings, or any other unsportsman-like conduct towards another member</Part>
</Section>
</Rules>
[/code]

By simply iterating over the XML as if it is data (similarly to how XSLT works), I'm able to generate this page.

Now, the next time I create a website for my clan, I don't have to go through every little rule to make sure it's formatted correctly. I can programattically iterate over each XML element, or apply XSLT to it, to generate the appropriate HTML/XHTML.

Cheers.

Both the navigation menu and the articles on vL main are stored in XML files. ASP opens them as an ADODB Recordset to build the page elements.

The members list on members.asp is also an XML file containing a recordset.

Yes...but why didn't they pick something that DIDN'T suck :)
I mean, it's ideal for markup, but for RPC calls, please.

And I personally hate PHP, I think it's terrible and no one should ever use it, but then again I make about 90% of my money using it (and 90% of headaches).

I think if you want to make money in the career world you should definatly be using Asp.net, because right now Asp is the most popular language for big business (they are the only ones who will shell out cash licensed for win servers :P) and Asp.net is far more powerful then classic but is still a fledgeling technology. Wait a little while longer and Asp.net will surpas Asp classic. I am seeing more and more Asp.net questions at http://forums.webdeveloper.com so there is a steeady increase. Asp.net offers the best language flexability of any server side technology and each languages is OO so you can definatly find a syntax you are used to if you have done other scripting and you will be able to do OO no matter what you choose.

ASP.NET doesn't play nice with graphic designers IMO.

asp.net does not play with w3 standards nicely either. I can make my pages valid html 4.01 strict, or hell even xhtml if I wanted too, it is just a pain in the butt. You have to go the extra mile just to make it html4.01 trans... you cant use the built in pageing, validators and other premade stuff about asp.net will not output a type attribute. I guess that is the price you pay though. I should try to make all of my stuff valid xhtml but it would mean ditching the form runat="server" and ditching many asp.net elements, I am willing to go for a lesser doctype for this conveiniance.... Plus I do not want to have to give up my precious form name attribute.

[quote author=St0rm.iD link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=15#msg52309 date=1080526050]
ASP.NET doesn't play nice with graphic designers IMO.
[/quote]

Sure it does. You create your graphical design/layout in ImageReady and then modify the HTML accordingly.

[quote author=peofeoknight link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=15#msg52564 date=1080612435]
asp.net does not play with w3 standards nicely either. I can make my pages valid html 4.01 strict, or hell even xhtml if I wanted too, it is just a pain in the butt. You have to go the extra mile just to make it html4.01 trans... you cant use the built in pageing, validators and other premade stuff about asp.net will not output a type attribute. I guess that is the price you pay though. I should try to make all of my stuff valid xhtml but it would mean ditching the form runat="server" and ditching many asp.net elements, I am willing to go for a lesser doctype for this conveiniance.... Plus I do not want to have to give up my precious form name attribute.
[/quote]

I have never had a problem with emitting valid XHTML.

humm, you using a <form runat="server">? Asp.net will output the name attribute so it will cause problems if you want to use xhtml. But there are articles like this http://weblogs.asp.net/scottgu/archive/2003/11/25/39620.aspx floating around so I might be able to solve some problems, but then there is this http://mcmanus.typepad.com/grind/2003/09/xhtml_in_aspnet.html I am a dw user... I might need to play around with some other programs in the future!

[quote author=Myndfyre link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=15#msg52582 date=1080615349]
[quote author=St0rm.iD link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=15#msg52309 date=1080526050]
ASP.NET doesn't play nice with graphic designers IMO.
[/quote]

Sure it does. You create your graphical design/layout in ImageReady and then modify the HTML accordingly.
[/quote]

I concede.

At work they have me using JSP, and I'm rather liking it. I do almost all the work in regular .java files, and the JSP works as a kind of a front end, making calls to the right classes.

Yeah, that's the way I do things in Python.

I am not a fan of Java myself. I know it, infact I was forced to learn it. Colledge board swapped out c++ with Java for AP comp sci, which is pretty weak. But I myself would not go near jsp with asp.net around here because the one really good thing java has going for it is the fact that it is object oriented, but with asp.net you have a similar (but I consider c# to be a bit easier to use though I do most of my stuff in vb.net) syntax, all langs are fully oo, and asp.net completely blows jsp away in speed. Thats just from the comparisons I have read and my experience with c# java and other scripting, feel free to set me straight if you do not aggree with me :P. I am one of those pro ms jerks incase you have not realized by now.

[quote author=peofeoknight link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=15#msg52963 date=1080786867]
I am not a fan of Java myself. I know it, infact I was forced to learn it. Colledge board swapped out c++ with Java for AP comp sci, which is pretty weak. But I myself would not go near jsp with asp.net around here because the one really good thing java has going for it is the fact that it is object oriented, but with asp.net you have a similar (but I consider c# to be a bit easier to use though I do most of my stuff in vb.net) syntax, all langs are fully oo, and asp.net completely blows jsp away in speed. Thats just from the comparisons I have read and my experience with c# java and other scripting, feel free to set me straight if you do not aggree with me :P. I am one of those pro ms jerks incase you have not realized by now.
[/quote]

I don't have to argue. If you don't like Java, you obvoiusly haven't done enough with it. I used to be where you are, too. I got a job requiring Java and completely changed my point of view.

Maybe if I had a better teacher or got to learn how to do real world stuff I would be more interested and like it more. We do not even use guis in java, its either in a prompt, or we use an applet... but nothing executable with an interface.

[quote author=peofeoknight link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=15#msg53113 date=1080857551]
Maybe if I had a better teacher or got to learn how to do real world stuff I would be more interested and like it more. We do not even use guis in java, its either in a prompt, or we use an applet... but nothing executable with an interface.
[/quote]

There's nothing wrong with commandlines.

[quote author=iago link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=15#msg53079 date=1080844616]
I don't have to argue. If you don't like Java, you obvoiusly haven't done enough with it. I used to be where you are, too. I got a job requiring Java and completely changed my point of view.
[/quote]

I like Java well enough (although sometimes the windowing is scary! You should see my first Java window -- you'd laugh hysterically). It's OOP-ability is good, but to be honest, you might want to look at C#, iago. C# = Java + enumerations + custom value-types + methods on value-types + events + type-safe function pointers - ActionListener interface + etc. - some yucky stuff.

:)

That's pseudocode. :P

[quote author=Myndfyre link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=15#msg53145 date=1080877006]
[quote author=iago link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=15#msg53079 date=1080844616]
I don't have to argue. If you don't like Java, you obvoiusly haven't done enough with it. I used to be where you are, too. I got a job requiring Java and completely changed my point of view.
[/quote]

I like Java well enough (although sometimes the windowing is scary! You should see my first Java window -- you'd laugh hysterically). It's OOP-ability is good, but to be honest, you might want to look at C#, iago. C# = Java + enumerations + custom value-types + methods on value-types + events + type-safe function pointers - ActionListener interface + etc. - some yucky stuff.

:)

That's pseudocode. :P
[/quote]

Java has everything you just stated, and if it doesn't directly support it, you can easily simulate it. Enumerations would be a good example of something easily simulated in Java.

Let's keep in mind were C# came from and why it was developed. :P

well it is true that they stole many of their products... but they are still some of the best out there. MS sql server for example, that was not an ms original, I fogot what comany they took it from but it was a small company and ms took the product and drove them under. They have some good economic sence over their a MS.

[quote author=peofeoknight link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=30#msg53235 date=1080935997]
well it is true that they stole many of their products... but they are still some of the best out there. MS sql server for example, that was not an ms original, I fogot what comany they took it from but it was a small company and ms took the product and drove them under. They have some good economic sence over their a MS.
[/quote]

Oh don't get me wrong, I do agree they have some quality products out their. As far as having good economic sense, they have some of the best. E-Commerce is going to be huge some day. More specificaly I-Commerce, and Billy is all over it.

[quote author=Tuberload link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=15#msg53167 date=1080891135]
[quote author=Myndfyre link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=15#msg53145 date=1080877006]
[quote author=iago link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=15#msg53079 date=1080844616]
I don't have to argue. If you don't like Java, you obvoiusly haven't done enough with it. I used to be where you are, too. I got a job requiring Java and completely changed my point of view.
[/quote]

I like Java well enough (although sometimes the windowing is scary! You should see my first Java window -- you'd laugh hysterically). It's OOP-ability is good, but to be honest, you might want to look at C#, iago. C# = Java + enumerations + custom value-types + methods on value-types + events + type-safe function pointers - ActionListener interface + etc. - some yucky stuff.

:)

That's pseudocode. :P
[/quote]

Java has everything you just stated, and if it doesn't directly support it, you can easily simulate it. Enumerations would be a good example of something easily simulated in Java.

Let's keep in mind were C# came from and why it was developed. :P
[/quote]

C# eh? Will that run on Linux? Because I've done 90% of my Java work on and as a result of using Linux.

[quote author=iago link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=30#msg53246 date=1080942310]
[quote author=Tuberload link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=15#msg53167 date=1080891135]
[quote author=Myndfyre link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=15#msg53145 date=1080877006]
[quote author=iago link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=15#msg53079 date=1080844616]
I don't have to argue. If you don't like Java, you obvoiusly haven't done enough with it. I used to be where you are, too. I got a job requiring Java and completely changed my point of view.
[/quote]

I like Java well enough (although sometimes the windowing is scary! You should see my first Java window -- you'd laugh hysterically). It's OOP-ability is good, but to be honest, you might want to look at C#, iago. C# = Java + enumerations + custom value-types + methods on value-types + events + type-safe function pointers - ActionListener interface + etc. - some yucky stuff.

:)

That's pseudocode. :P
[/quote]

Java has everything you just stated, and if it doesn't directly support it, you can easily simulate it. Enumerations would be a good example of something easily simulated in Java.

Let's keep in mind were C# came from and why it was developed. :P
[/quote]

C# eh? Will that run on Linux? Because I've done 90% of my Java work on and as a result of using Linux.
[/quote] I am a moron in this subject, but how well does c++ run on linux? I am more on the web then in client ap scripting so I really do not know about that kind of stuff. I hear from some people that it runs great, that it does not run at all, or that it runs slow, which is it?

C++ runs as well on linux as on Windows. It's compiled to machine code on both, so it's ok.

BUT, a lot of programs use optimizations that are platform specific. And if you start working with things like guis and sockets and anything platform-specific, you will have to rewrite a lot of code for it to work.

[quote author=iago link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=30#msg53246 date=1080942310]
[quote author=Tuberload link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=15#msg53167 date=1080891135]
[quote author=Myndfyre link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=15#msg53145 date=1080877006]
[quote author=iago link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=15#msg53079 date=1080844616]
I don't have to argue. If you don't like Java, you obvoiusly haven't done enough with it. I used to be where you are, too. I got a job requiring Java and completely changed my point of view.
[/quote]

I like Java well enough (although sometimes the windowing is scary! You should see my first Java window -- you'd laugh hysterically). It's OOP-ability is good, but to be honest, you might want to look at C#, iago. C# = Java + enumerations + custom value-types + methods on value-types + events + type-safe function pointers - ActionListener interface + etc. - some yucky stuff.

:)

That's pseudocode. :P
[/quote]

Java has everything you just stated, and if it doesn't directly support it, you can easily simulate it. Enumerations would be a good example of something easily simulated in Java.

Let's keep in mind were C# came from and why it was developed. :P
[/quote]

C# eh? Will that run on Linux? Because I've done 90% of my Java work on and as a result of using Linux.
[/quote]

How does what I said have anything to do with Linux? I pointed out that C# was created because of Java and you point out Linux...

Iago uses linux, and as a result uses Java because it is cross-platform and works on most/all operating systems. If he were to switch to C#, that too would have to be cross-platform because he works in a linux environment, and most of the rest of the world uses windows.

Why not use c++ since it can go cross platform too. C++ will run faster on windows, we all aggree, but I would not be supprised if it ran faster on linux too. What tics me off is that Java makes my phone lag... I have java games and they take forever to load (but that fox fotball game rocks graphics wise, it is better then the super nintendo football games, I can just sit and play and play and play...)

[quote author=peofeoknight link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=30#msg53301 date=1080968225]
Why not use c++ since it can go cross platform too. C++ will run faster on windows, we all aggree, but I would not be supprised if it ran faster on linux too. What tics me off is that Java makes my phone lag... I have java games and they take forever to load (but that fox fotball game rocks graphics wise, it is better then the super nintendo football games, I can just sit and play and play and play...)
[/quote]

I don't worry about Java interfacing with my phone.

If I use c++ I would have to reprogram parts of my code (sockets, gui, and probably others) to work on different platforms. Plus, I enjoy working with Java, it has so much more useful built-in stuff that I use. You can do *anything* in java.

[quote author=iago link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=30#msg53317 date=1080987800]
If I use c++ I would have to reprogram parts of my code (sockets, gui, and probably others) to work on different platforms. Plus, I enjoy working with Java, it has so much more useful built-in stuff that I use. You can do *anything* in java.
[/quote]

If you do all sorts of things in java, you'll have to reprogram parts to work on different platforms. Say for example that you were to program a system service or a systray icon - those would need changing since those things just don't exist on all platforms.

You can stick to standard socket calls in C++, using select, and your code will run with very very few changes on both Windows and unix. The program won't be as efficient as if you adapted your code to use the best performer for each platform, but then, java isn't efficient either.

[quote author=Adron link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=30#msg53320 date=1080994927]
[quote author=iago link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=30#msg53317 date=1080987800]
If I use c++ I would have to reprogram parts of my code (sockets, gui, and probably others) to work on different platforms. Plus, I enjoy working with Java, it has so much more useful built-in stuff that I use. You can do *anything* in java.
[/quote]

If you do all sorts of things in java, you'll have to reprogram parts to work on different platforms. Say for example that you were to program a system service or a systray icon - those would need changing since those things just don't exist on all platforms.

You can stick to standard socket calls in C++, using select, and your code will run with very very few changes on both Windows and unix. The program won't be as efficient as if you adapted your code to use the best performer for each platform, but then, java isn't efficient either.
[/quote]

I've written 80% of JBBot on Linux and 20% on windows, and it works on Linux, Windows, and Mac (I've seen it on all 3) perfictly without any changes.

[code]Another thing: threading. I wrote a keepalive timer in Java that looks like this:

[cpde] keepalive = new Timer();
keepalive.schedule(new TimerTask() { public void run() { log("Sending keepalive...", 5); try { send(new BNetBuffer((byte)0x00)); } catch(IOException e) { } } }, 60000, 60000);[/code]

and it works on all platforms. If I was writing portable C++ code, how would I do that?

You couldn't write a single code that works on all platforms as far as I know. You'd have to pick a standard and it'd work on all platforms supporting that standard. Threads aren't part of the C++ language standard. This means that C++ can run on systems that don't support threading, apparently java can't?

[quote author=Adron link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=30#msg53341 date=1081009506]
You couldn't write a single code that works on all platforms as far as I know. You'd have to pick a standard and it'd work on all platforms supporting that standard. Threads aren't part of the C++ language standard. This means that C++ can run on systems that don't support threading, apparently java can't?
[/quote]

I would guess that the Java Virtual Machine implements its own threading functions (much like how it implements its own GUI functionality), so (I'm guessing this) the JVM would probably be able to use threading on platforms that don't support it.

If you're happy (or, in fact, if it's convenient) to write code for a single standard, then C++ is great. I'm not, however, so Java works better. It's really a matter of what you need.

I'm just looking at Sun's documentation. If you try to make a gui on a platform that doesn't support guis (ie, console), you get a HeadlessException thrown. There's no exception thrown by java.lang.Thread, so I would imagine it can do it anywhere.

It would be interesting to test, though :)

[quote author=iago link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=30#msg53246 date=1080942310]
[quote author=Tuberload link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=15#msg53167 date=1080891135]
[quote author=Myndfyre link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=15#msg53145 date=1080877006]
[quote author=iago link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=15#msg53079 date=1080844616]
I don't have to argue. If you don't like Java, you obvoiusly haven't done enough with it. I used to be where you are, too. I got a job requiring Java and completely changed my point of view.
[/quote]

I like Java well enough (although sometimes the windowing is scary! You should see my first Java window -- you'd laugh hysterically). It's OOP-ability is good, but to be honest, you might want to look at C#, iago. C# = Java + enumerations + custom value-types + methods on value-types + events + type-safe function pointers - ActionListener interface + etc. - some yucky stuff.

:)

That's pseudocode. :P
[/quote]

Java has everything you just stated, and if it doesn't directly support it, you can easily simulate it. Enumerations would be a good example of something easily simulated in Java.

Let's keep in mind were C# came from and why it was developed. :P
[/quote]

C# eh? Will that run on Linux? Because I've done 90% of my Java work on and as a result of using Linux.
[/quote]

Well I wasn't going to fight the battle, but bleh...

First, to Tuberload -- yes, you can emulate many things in Java, such as type-safe enumerations, but look at how they really work. The C# compiler treats them as constants, whereas the closest way to do that in Java -- make a class with several instances that are static and constant -- requires the memory to make those instances and hold them in memory throught the application lifetime. They are also passed by reference, whereas C# enumerations are passed by value. Pointers can not be done in Java, value types can not be done in Java, methods on value types can't be done in Java (in C# I can call int.ToString() -- in Java, I have to make a new object -- new Integer(myInteger).toString(). ). Properties (encapsulated methods that appear to be public fields). Overloaded operators. Classes hosting events. Implicit threading when those events are called (any number of events can host any number of hooked listeners; when the event is called, each listener function gets its own thread). It may very well be that C# was created to compete with Java. It's certainly doing a fine job. I had Java homework that I couldn't quite get right; I implemented it in C# and within 5 minutes had it converted back to Java, because they're so similar.

iago: for C#, yes, the Mono project supports it:
http://www.go-mono.com/
While the entirety of the .NET framework doesn't translate over -- for example, the Windows.Forms namespace, much of it does -- they have the web server functionality working on Linux, for example.

The claimed "goal" of the .NET platform is cross-language, cross-platform interoperability with a single binary. What you compile on Windows you should be able to run on Linux. That's probably a few versions off, and probably won't be done by Microsoft, but steps are being taken to get there, which is positive.

Like I said, I like Java well enough. All things considered, though, C# is like Java on steroids. It's got the nice syntax and flavor of Java, but a ton of sweet features that Java just doesn't have.

Java sucks. I needed to write an online game lobby, and discovered how much Java/Swing really sucks. It's way too thread-heavy (threads are BAD...I don't care what you say), slow, overly-OOP and design pattern heavy, and...worst of all...acts differently on different machines. Not to mention you need the absolute latest JVM because they keep changing the classfile format.

Java had good ideas, but implemented them TERRIBLY.

[quote author=St0rm.iD link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=45#msg53382 date=1081031461]
Java sucks. I needed to write an online game lobby, and discovered how much Java/Swing really sucks. It's way too thread-heavy (threads are BAD...I don't care what you say), slow, overly-OOP and design pattern heavy, and...worst of all...acts differently on different machines. Not to mention you need the absolute latest JVM because they keep changing the classfile format.

Java had good ideas, but implemented them TERRIBLY.
[/quote]

Hmm, so all that preaching you did in 2002 about Java was based on what experience?

I've spent that last week and a half learning swing, and I'm really enjoying it. Swing is great to program with, you can do so many cool things. And I've never had a problem with speed, but I would imagine that would depend a little on your machine.

[quote author=Grok link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=45#msg53383 date=1081031587]
[quote author=St0rm.iD link=board=22;threadid=6005;start=45#msg53382 date=1081031461]
Java sucks. I needed to write an online game lobby, and discovered how much Java/Swing really sucks. It's way too thread-heavy (threads are BAD...I don't care what you say), slow, overly-OOP and design pattern heavy, and...worst of all...acts differently on different machines. Not to mention you need the absolute latest JVM because they keep changing the classfile format.

Java had good ideas, but implemented them TERRIBLY.
[/quote]

Hmm, so all that preaching you did in 2002 about Java was based on what experience?
[/quote]

Based on server-side development...which is great for small-scale servers.

http://www.pcquest.com/content/search/showarticle.asp?arid=47162&way=search
myndfyre said this already I believe but asp.net will run on linux, so it is a big myth that asp.net has to use iis, and has to run on windows, and that is costs $ to use.