Reminds me of the quote that less then 10% of a typical Windows install is C#.
For a mod team it doesn’t hurt, so go ahead if you want to make one. 
Reminds me of the quote that less then 10% of a typical Windows install is C#.
For a mod team it doesn’t hurt, so go ahead if you want to make one. 
Reminds me of the quote that less then 10% of a typical Windows install is C#.[/quote]
That reminds me of the quote that less than 10% of a typical windows install is Moo.
:???:
What would this forum be like without all the insightfull and informative postings from the SD team… :rolleyes:
Less confused.
If it wasn’t for Salteh, a place with a typing error more! (Not that this matters if one would look at the unreadable posts…)
I was actually wondering about your… “10% of a typical windows install is c#” thing! wtf do you mean 
“10% of school is pencils” ? 
Ok, I wasn’t too clear there. It’s just that Microsoft uses allmost no C# themselves for their Windows OS, even though they ‘made’ C#.
It was meant as a quote anyway, I just don’t remember who said it where.
Which one?
1.0?
2.0?
3.x?
95?
98?
98se?
ME?
NT?
NT 4.0?
2k?
CE?
Mob?
Mob2k3SE?
CE3.0?
CE5.0?
XP Emb?
XP?
2003?
Vista?
:moo:?
Sigh Then look it up if you’re so curious… :nag:
But if you think about it, Win 95 and earlier are surely not included, C# was non-existant there.
They are using it more and more, which is one of the reason Windows keeps bloating up.
Mark Russinovich wrote about performance and memory footprint of managed applications in his blog. Using C# is a bad idea when you want to squeeze out as many FPS as possible. 