you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 6 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Thinking C++ is advanced C is like thinking C# is advanced Java. Even if they were really similar at a point, they've moved on and diverged into their own thing. Things don't necessarily get better; more often than not they just change.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

    C# is a bad example. I'm happy it became its own thing over time and has since evolved in a different direction. But it was most definitely and unabashedly Microsoft's Java clone at the start.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 1 day ago (1 child)

    It was definitely a reply to Java but I’d argue it was very much Delphi/ObjectPascal with C syntax. Which makes sense with the language creator.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago*

    Yeah, you just said the same the same thing I said with different words.

    Java was also based heavily on Pascal at first.

    A Java Application Servers Report (2010) opens with a brief history of Java that says:

    It all started back in 1991 at Sun Microsystems Corporation, […] Patrick Naugthon, […] proposed a project to his friend and CEO Scott McNealy for the development of a small, simple, portable computer environment that could control all types of electronic components.

    The language must use the principle of a virtual machine […] It must also be based on the current object-oriented language, C++, […] The project went ahead under the name "green" and the language was based on an old model of USCD Pascal, which makes it possible to generate interpretive code.

    The Java development team has white papers dissecting Delphi Object Pascal for the discussion and development of Java features. This one is funny in that it discusses and discards a feature of Microsoft's J++, on which Hejlsberg worked too.

  • source
  • parent