Content deleted Content added
→Proposal for Deletion: I agree, it should go |
→Proposal for Deletion: More, to clarify |
||
Line 435:
:: This article has become a kind of forums where C# advocates like to push their own Point of views, I think without even knowing they are doing this. For example, there was a lengthy discussion where people considered that java did not have events, because part of the events framework was provided by the BCL. But the same people have no problem to write that C# has Expression trees or Query language, where it is only a BCL feature. [[User:Hervegirod|Hervegirod]] ([[User talk:Hervegirod|talk]]) 14:33, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
I agree that there is original synthesis going on here. If we are to have an article on this subject, then the sources should limited to reliable publications that explicitly ''compare'' C# and Java. I don't think there are many of those - maybe the introductory sections of some books that then go on to describe one language or the other in detail. Of course, if those books are themselves published by Microsoft or Sun (Oracle), then they are hardly neutral. As it stands, this article is mostly a mess of "mine is bigger than yours" bragging by fans, and not much use to ordinary readers. I tried to join in the discussion about events, but just got shouted down, from what I remember. I haven't bothered since, and that's no way to run a WP article. --[[User:Nigelj|Nigelj]] ([[User talk:Nigelj|talk]]) 16:31, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
To make my point more clear, we need to start from "The developers of Java based it on the C++ programming language, but removed many of the language features that are rarely used or often used poorly."[http://www.webbasedprogramming.com/Java-Unleashed/ch03.htm] (I can't remember where I first came across that on Sun's old website). What C# seems to have done (although Microsoft won't admit it) is start by directly copying the Java language and concept, then, release by release, adding back in various C++, VB and other random concepts, whether they are or could be used poorly or not. This article repeats, "C# has this; does Java have this? No? Fail." It does this without considering ''why'' the feature was left out of Java, what the pros and cons of providing developers with the feature are, or any other relevant issue. Take the first point in the comparison table: "Single-root (unified) type system? Java No; C# Yes". This could be worded, "Explicit language expression of when expensive boxing and unboxing routines have been invoked? Java Yes; C# No". This is what I meant above by '"mine is bigger than yours" bragging by fans', without the depth of coverage that would make the comparison useful to readers. For possible reader types, consider the project manager needing to decide which language to hire developers to develop a solution in, or the school-leaver deciding which language to study in depth to further their programming career. This article is too shallow and too detailed to help either of these. Who is it aimed at? Surely not just the egos of the Wikipedia authors who wrote it?! --[[User:Nigelj|Nigelj]] ([[User talk:Nigelj|talk]]) 17:21, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
| |||