[RDF] Little bits of thinkering...

[Stefan Andersson]

Yo, ppl!

I'm reading about MS new OO language C# (C-sharp) on:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/nettop.asp

The language is pitched as a 'Java killer', aiming for most of the nifty
features that made Java cool.

It's just about as 'keep it simple and useful' as I have come to expect
MS to be... ( Hi Jonas! ;-d )

Anyway. I thought I'd relate some of the things to WRAF...

#1: C# is using function namespaces, by using the statement 'using ns'
you 'load' namespace (module) ns, and so gain access to all the
functions in it. Pure WRAF.
(It also have a 'aliasing' method to avoid namespace collisions...
wuzzies)

#2: There is no file boundary any more. All programs are classes, which
means a file can hold more than one program. Remember my
package#function thought yesterday? WRAF me, baby!

#3: It is totally COM+ integrated, wich means all different levels of
MS-compatible object technologies can access each other seamlessly -
operating system, server, client, script and dll. And with SOAP, method
invocations goes thru firewalls as well... yummy! And WRAFfy!

#4: Did I tell you about the 'parallell failure channel' I thought of
some years ago? I think every language should have an 'error stack' you
could put all the messages, non-critical failures, critical failures and
breaks in, so that when a process finally stops, you have a complete
failure log stack. Of course this would consist of diagnostic data and
plain text messages as well as error codes. This way, you could safely
assume that the error was reported on the correct level, and brought up
the levels... 

No, it's not in C#, I just came to think about it when I read about C#
new error handling, which still is of ye olde 'try/catch' type... 
and #ifdef DEBUG  * shiver of disgust *

(The parallell failure channel really should be a feature of the
semi-SOAP I'm more and more interested in developing! We really should
call it WORF, for Web Object Remote Functions! (Or WRAF Object Remote
Functinality...))

Other than that, I think MS has succeeded in making another 'lets
semi-script it all together, but in the end script it all' solution... I
don't think I'll be using it...

Damn! This is getting dangerously close to what I saw in that vision
back in '97. Thank God MS obviously haven't seen the data ==
presentation == logic thing yet, and thought about combining it with
recursive self-reference.

Gotta move faster, boys!
/Stefan