>> So does .Net have a less horribly broken library design then?
> 
> I would say it does, actually, yes.
> 
> Now, granted, it's very *complex*, because it has a lot in it.
> 
> But overall, it's surprisingly clean.

Java has a long list of brokeness. The language itself is horridly 
broken, but the standard libraries are insane...

It's been a while since I actually used Java. But IIRC, the Object class 
has a surprisingly vast collection of methods. The base class for AWT 
widgets is *huge*. And there are multiple methods which apparently do 
the same thing... except... they don't... but it's not documented... Hmm.

Other fun things include the frequency with which they deprecate massive 
sections of the API and provide new ones. (IIRC, originally we did 
stream-type stuff with stream wrappers. And then they added "readers" 
and "writers" and deprecated all the old interfaces.)

Basically, if you run the same program on several different JVMs, you 
get wildly different behaviour, because nobody is sure exactly what all 
the GUI-related method calls are actually *meant* to do...

I really hope .Net has managed to avoid all that...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message