ECMA Controls C# Language Definition

Microsoft might be responsible for the creation of C#, but the language definition is under the control of ECMA.

Letters to Visual Studio Magazine are welcome. Letters must include your name, address, and daytime phone number to be considered for publication. Letters might be edited for form, fit, and style. Please send them to Letters to the Editor, c/o Visual Studio Magazine, 2600 El Camino Real, Suite 300, San Mateo, CA 94403; fax them to 650-570-6307; or e-mail them to [email protected].

ECMA Controls C# Language Definition
I would like to respond to Mr. Frank Molnar and his comments regarding a lack of standards around .NET and the inability of hobbyist developers to work with these languages (C# and VB.NET) without paying Microsoft [Letters to the Editor, "Lack of Standards Lessens .NET's Appeal," November 2004].

Yes, it is true that Microsoft is responsible for the creation of the C# language. However, Microsoft no longer retains control of the language definition, which is in the hands of ECMA.

Another point is that the .NET Framework SDK includes (for free) both the C# and VB.NET language compilers. So, while Microsoft is making money on Visual Studio .NET, choosing to go with .NET in no way means you need to pay Microsoft to be a hobbyist developer with .NET and C#/VB.NET. Just take a look at the Visual Studio Express Editions or the third-party IDEs that are available such as Web Matrix, which are targeted at those users who are interested in the environment but don't have the money for the professional-level IDE tools from Microsoft.

He also missed the point that Mono and other efforts are bringing .NET to other platforms.

I would also pose a question to Mr. Molnar regarding the cost of migrating: How much is it costing you to manage and maintain your existing applications that contain "a few million lines of XBase code and a few million lines of VB5/VB6 code"? Is it not at least possible that some of those applications might be better suited, and thus less expensive, to run in an environment with a robust application framework, enhanced security control, easier access to application instrumentation, and more? Given my experience as a consultant and having worked with a number of enterprise customers and their internally built applications, it seems highly likely that this is the case.

While I can certainly appreciate Mr. Molnar's lack of financial motivation to migrate all of his applications to VB.NET, I believe there are a few holes in his argument against these newer languages and the .NET environment as a whole.

Chris Fussell, Marietta, Ga.

SQL for the Masses
I really enjoyed Roman Rehak's Database Design column, "Speed Up SQL Server Apps," in the July 2004 issue. It was written at a level I can understand and provided examples that make sense. Too often I find an article on SQL that's written for a much higher level than where I'm at. I could use just about every tip provided.

Keep up the good work, fellas. I love reading your magazine.

Dave Campbell, Holdrege, Neb.

About the Author

This story was written or compiled based on feedback from the readers of Visual Studio Magazine.

comments powered by Disqus


Subscribe on YouTube