The point? To rag on C# for introducing dynamic when others already had it? He even poked at C# not being serious, as he put it, because the FRAMEWORK didn't have IPC. Um, okay?
Look, with some portion of dynamic being usefel everywhere and with the growing demand thereof, it was prudent to add these features. Heck, optionals and named were hotly contested features since 1.0 due to introducing mechanisms that were ultimately not important at the time. It introduces complexity, etc.
Maybe C# should give him a pony, too.
There were many other trumpeted features in C# as well as the framework as a whole.
If I may quote: ".. were hotly contested features since 1.0" This was around the year 2k IIRC. They honestly took ±10 years to include basic features while claiming to have a businessproof framework? Yeah, maybe - for ex-Java golems who still have WinXP developing _and_ server machines. As we all know, those would be.. the real business guys.
As to the "other trumpeted features" - I can't recall any on the beforehand mentioned release notes. Maybe the "improved COM" support. Have fun calling Excel for generating your CSV files.
This shows an axe to grind with C#, and not for the sake of C#. While you're information and insights were definitely interesting, I don't think that it really amounted to anything beyond, "Gimme a pony!".
Look, with some portion of dynamic being usefel everywhere and with the growing demand thereof, it was prudent to add these features. Heck, optionals and named were hotly contested features since 1.0 due to introducing mechanisms that were ultimately not important at the time. It introduces complexity, etc.
Maybe C# should give him a pony, too.
There were many other trumpeted features in C# as well as the framework as a whole.