[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Yep, that is the sad side effect. I have to admit
it is a brilliant play by MS and defensible. Sun made
that inevitable and because we have tried to use
"standard" as a way to push more emphasis on the
W3C and away from ISO et al, and not properly conveyed
that a specification for a system to be built and
tested could then become the basis for a standard for
a system that works and does a well-spec'd job so
evolves only when that job changes, we helped make
all that possible. That was the danger of emphasizing
Internet Time as affecting a standard. IMO, the
idea of recommendations and specifications as the
basis for the W3C was brilliant precisely because
it accounts for the effects of the rapid communications
and community-building we call Internet Time.
All that aside, do you think the CLR notion has
the technical merit that it deserves a second
implementation?
len
-----Original Message-----
From: Tim Bray [mailto:tbray@textuality.com]
Bullard, Claude L (Len) wrote:
> "ECMA has finished the standardization of the common language
> infrastructure of the .NET Framework and the C# programming language,
> taking yet another step towards building an open XML Web services platform."
>
> Weird how the world turns. MS supports a standard and Java advocates are
> backing a proprietary language.
As of now, C# represents a total commitment to Microsoft lock-in,
and Java doesn't particularly lock you into anyone. C# could be
fixed by ensuring there were multiple CLR implementations that
worked equally well and had no Windows dependencies. This may
well happen.
I'm not saying that the way Sun leans on Java is defensible, or
that there's anything wrong with C# as a language. -Tim
|
