Quote:

Depends on the application, as always.

If you're looking for high performance, then C# might not be what you want. If you're looking for a robust, garbage-collected, well-thought-out language, with a huge class library, and good IDE support (at least on Windows), then give C# a look.

Personally, I use both, depending on my needs.


Obviously this is true, but it seems that C no longer cuts it when accessing the latest and greatest features of the operating system, I can't see this getting any easier with the release of vista.

I think what I'm trying to get at is that they've effectively depreciated 'C' as a language without having a native alternative that allows access to all the latest operating system features.

Mac OS X has objective 'C' but Microsoft appear to have nothing. I feel that implementing anything in 'C' on the MS platform is now a waste of time/effort because of it's apparent status.

Now if they were to build a native C# compiler and C# libraries (assemblies? not 100% on this terminology, but I assume then .NET libraries are also interpreted) then they might have a viable alternative to 'C'.......

3 Years ago MFC was dead (not that I've ever used it in anger), now they appear to be saying that it's alive and well and that they're going to be making improvements to it, is that a backtrack? Is that MS admitting that .NET is useless for anything other than trivial applications?

Adrian