And before that UCSD Pascal, my second language after Fortran.

The "Managed" apparently comes from the idea that the CLR manages the program. When everything was strictly typed, i.e., identified by signature, they could make a case. But that proved unworkable in real applications, hence the rise of reflection, and finally the creation of the Dynamic type. So much for Managed.

What MS has done with .Net has little, then, to do with Managed. It does have to do with having created a rich ecology of resources that are continually honed to become more useful, and more used, by developers. Microsoft's track record is #1 in the industry, it seems to me, in moving development resources forward in a coherent manner toward a goal of enabling developers. There are tools elsewhere that do everything that MS provides. But with Microsoft's tools, I know they will evolve in a way that makes them easier to use, one with another (albeit it can take 5 to 6 versions for things to come around). With other toolsets, it's pretty much hit or miss.

I'm using IronPython: I don't need no stinking Managed. <s> I do desire the use of the resources.

Hank

>Mike,
>
>Remove the CLR-centricity and you could maintain that fox code has been "managed" for decades, compiling to IL rather than directly to executing code.
>
>IMHO it's a bit like the "schweppervescence" term used to describe a certain manufacturer's pop as if their fizz is somehow distinct. Only in that it has a particular label and maker. ;-) Which is fair enough if the name of a maker implies credibility as MS does, though typically makers like to infer some sort of extra quality inherent in the product itself.