Is .NET 4.0 a replacement of 2.0?

  • Thread starter Thread starter CSharpner
  • Start date Start date
C

CSharpner

When .NET upgraded from 2.0 to 3.0 (and again to 3.5), 3.0 and 3.5
weren't really totally new versions of .NET. They required 2.0 to be
there and were more of an extension or and add-on to 2.0.

What about .NET 4.0? Is it a complete framework all on its own? Or
does it require 2.0 (and/or 3.x)?

TIA
 
CSharpner said:
When .NET upgraded from 2.0 to 3.0 (and again to 3.5), 3.0 and 3.5
weren't really totally new versions of .NET. They required 2.0 to be
there and were more of an extension or and add-on to 2.0.

What about .NET 4.0? Is it a complete framework all on its own? Or
does it require 2.0 (and/or 3.x)?
Click to expand...

The former.
 
The former.
Click to expand...

Thanks for responding, but I have the options in different orders in
both paragraphs, so I'm not sure which you're calling "the former".
Is 4.0 an add-on or a replacement?

Sorry for the confusion.
 
CSharpner said:
Thanks for responding, but I have the options in different orders in
both paragraphs, so I'm not sure which you're calling "the former".
Is 4.0 an add-on or a replacement?

Sorry for the confusion.
Click to expand...

4.0 is a complete new framework.
 
CSharpner said:
Thanks for responding, but I have the options in different orders in
both paragraphs, so I'm not sure which you're calling "the former".
Is 4.0 an add-on or a replacement?
Click to expand...

I only saw two sentences that were actual questions, which were the ones
to which I responded and referred. Sorry it wasn't more clear.
 
I only saw two sentences that were actual questions, which were the ones
to which I responded and referred.  Sorry it wasn't more clear.
Click to expand...

Very true. Only two were questions. Unfortunately, a lot of people
(not you, of course) aren't as direct and logical as you are. I
couldn't tell which kind of replyer you were. :)
 
Back
Top