> it's about time the language got some "cool" > features and damn the people that use them irresponsibly!
The new dynamic features target very specific scenarios like COM interop - Ander's is way too level-headed and experienced to be influenced by coolness. I do agree that the new features do have potential to do harm - the "let-add-a-design-pattern-here-because-it-make-me-look-smart" developer will definitely abuse the new features. There ain't much you can do at a language level to solve that - it's ultimately a HR issue for a development shop with these people. -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of silky Sent: Thursday, 11 February 2010 7:20 PM To: [email protected] Subject: OT - wondering; c# direction I wonder if I am alone, out here, in thinking that C# is (possibly) going in a strange and bad direction. We can notice that it is tending to more of a dynamic/scripting-like language, with less compile-time checks (or worded another way, more freedom) with features that you could argue are "generally" harmful, and only "sometimes" useful (Extension Methods being the primary example, anonymous classes being another). I just wonder if anyone else is legitimately concerned by this? Or is mostly the feeling that it's about time the language got some "cool" features and damn the people that use them irresponsibly! Not all the features are bad, to be sure, and mostly I'm just interested in thoughts (I have no real strong feelings on the matter, despite how it may seem); but it seems to me that we should go down the Spec# world of further restrictions to prevent various things even *becoming* code. Is the general "thing" that programmers care about now flexibility, as opposed to correctness? Or is it both? Are they exclusive? I don't think so. Anyway, this is probably too much off topic rambling to even warrant and OT tag; I just can't help but wonder if anyone else is legitimately concerned that it will lead to less maintainable systems in general. It seems (to me, just an outsider) that not much thought is given, specifically, to how the features could be used badly; only to how they could be used ideally (and we all know that few, if any, programmers are consistently programming "ideally"). Probably I should do a significant amount of work in 4.0 before commenting further. -- silky http://www.mirios.com.au/ http://island.mirios.com.au/t/rigby+random+20
