If not .Net then what?

[Herfried K. Wagner [MVP]]

And then readers must summarize all experiences posted and
make their own conclusions.

Facts are not subject of a poll. It's perfectly valid to request a proof to
substantiate claims.

 

[Tom Shelton]

"Miha Markic" <miha at rthand com> said:

Both C and C++ are defined by ISO standards. C compilers that conform to
ISO/IEC 9899:1990 are available on a very, very wide range of platforms,
including not just desktop and middle range machines, but also top-end
mainframes and tiny little embedded systems. To a lesser extent, this is
also true of C++. For hosted environments, this also includes the standard
library specified by ISO.

ISO/IEC 23270 (C#)
ISO/IEC 23271 (CLI)

 

[Arne Vajhøj]

Arne Vajhøj said:

(Presumably you mean 40 years total.)

Yup. As for the 2 C++ programmers.

Ask 10 programmers to write an app in any language, and I doubt the result
will be good.

It is possible, but the the process needs to be different.

Arne

 

[Arne Vajhøj]

Facts are not subject of a poll. It's perfectly valid to request a
proof to substantiate claims.

It is valid.

But the one doing it should expect to be laughed at.

Arne

 

[Arne Vajhøj]

If the above list of platforms where you can use Mono is accurate, and
I have no reason to doubt you, then it is /much/ less portable than
either C or C++.

Not necessary less portable.

C/C++ programs are usually not portable at all.

But absolutely less platforms available.

But the list does cover some of the most popular platforms.

Of the above list, I am only familiar with comments on its
functionality and compatibility with two of them relative to .NET on
Windows platforms, and they have been so far that it is not baked, and
does not allow relatively complex .NET apps written for Windows
platforms to move over easily, or in some cases at all.

In that sense it is much like C/C++ - stick with the standard
and it it portable - do some platform specific and it is not
portable.

Arne