I learned BASIC before I learned any C.  And when I learned C, you had clunky command line compilers with cryptic errors.  I did a lot of VisualBASIC coding and ended up doing mostly maintenance of VB code and forgot about C while C+, C++ and C# emerged.  I'm comfortable in VB, moderately aquainted with C#.  So a lot of what I do still is VB.

But, when I started working with WAP I learned in C#, so I now have an inner war that matches the external battles among C# and VB advocates.  And I really don't think either is better or worse for any project.  When I used to write COBOL and RPG, or even (shiver) Pascal, it wasn't because the langauge was better for the project I was doing, it was because that was what ran on the box.  8080 and Z80 assembler were used for the advantages of the language, but popping, peeking and poking my way around a system wasn't a very efficient use of my time.

In ASP.NET, language wars are nonsense.  Write what you're comfortable with, within the restrictions of the organization or client.  I'll bet the majority of programmers are writing C# or VB code because that's what they were hired to do, not strictly personal choice.

Jeff

I started on assembler - CDC and IBM versions - to cut down on coding and card punching we would build macros - the cards for these macros were guarded by each programmer and attached to the back of the punch cards for each program  just like a link library - the macros were usually named in english ternanology so a good and well equiped programmer could code an assembler program to read almost as a page or two of readable english as 90% or so of the program was made up of macros -  the move to Cobol thus was not a great step from assembler and basic was simply line after line of macro statements. The main difference between our assembler and say Cobol was that with assembler the link library was a couple of card boxes full of punch cards while in cobol the link library was on disk. The odd man out was Fortran which was a language totally different from assembler with macros and Cobol - very abstract till one got use to it. Basic on the other hand was a lazy and fast learnt language. I did a lot of control programs when the z80 arrived- stuff that was sent aloft or down to the bottom of the ocean to measure different things - this was all done in Control Basic - a mixture of assembler like statements and true basic statements - still used on a lot of control applications today.

My biggest hurdle was not to do with the language but the means to apply that language to the computer - I started on the 14/16 IBM range that required the programmer to wire wrap the program - start in a very simple assembler type language on paper then convert that to binary to produce the wire wrap patterns..Computers were fun in those days!!

The debate between the use of this or that language nowadays is really a non event - you now do not have memory or  storage restrictions so size of output code is really not a factor nowadays - if you need more memory then simply buy some more - code does not need to be efficent now adays memory is cheap, storage is cheap. Remember that in the days before the desktop you would write an accounting or stock system to run on 16K of core memory or if you were lucky 32K. - in those days what language you used was important.. With the z80 - bank switching was paramount as the output size of the compilers got bigger and bigger

However I cannot see the logic behind debating what the framework is actually written in - in theory it should only affect the core team because as every one knows we should not be changing the framework code!

The hardest thing I find to get used to with Net is that I can use different languages in the same program within the same 'compiler' or work bench - in the old days we could match and mix cobol assembler and fortran but each was written and compiled seperately then linked - but with VS you can chop and change actual code as your mode changes. You can also 'dissassemble' a net program into any of the net languages no matter what it was orginally written in. so which is best or better is really down to personnel preference - really has nothing to do with effeciency of the output code any longer.