Fair enough. I should have specified CLR instead of C# in general.
That said, I stand by my argument that it is better compared to Java, though the later revisions have been adding more C++-esque low level features. I find C# a good compromise.
> It should be compulsory for everyone to learn about compiler design, before comparing programming languages.
My oversight, and difference of opinion with you does not mean I'm an uneducated idiot. I wrote a (limited) C compiler in my undergrad and programming languages was large mandatory portion of 4th year. If you rear-ended somebody on your morning commute, I'm not going to assume you're a dangerous driver and should be pulled off the road.
This is Hacker News - not Reddit. The least we can do is act like that means something.
This is not true. The CLR is just one of many C# implementations.
Mono provides a native compiler for C#.
Bartok is a native compiler for C# from Microsoft Research.
> You couldn't write an operating system, or realtime code in C#.
Except people have already done it in the past.
http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/projects/singularity/
http://research.microsoft.com/apps/pubs/default.aspx?id=5271...
http://singularity.codeplex.com/
http://cosmos.codeplex.com/
> It's not even in the same league as the other three, and would be better compared to Java.
Similarly to Modula-3, C# has all the required low level capabilities for systems programming with unsafe blocks and annotations.
It should be compulsory for everyone to learn about compiler design, before comparing programming languages.