[Mono-dev] Future of Mono's .NET Code Sharing

[Miguel de Icaza]

Hello,

That would still work Johnnie, it would just be a Mono implementation detail that matters to people porting Mono to new platforms or actively involved in working in the core of Mono.

On 11/30/16, 3:37 PM, "Mono-devel-list on behalf of Johnnie Odom" <mono-devel-list-bounces at lists.dot.net on behalf of jodom at escambia.k12.fl.us> wrote:

    
    
    I write a lot of small sysadmin utilities using Mono and one of the big selling points with the .NET libraries I use is that they generally do work across Windows/Mac/Linux without recompilation. I think the future for Microsoft is to be as easily cross-platform as possible. I would strongly recommend going down the Mono path here.
    Johnnie
    
    >>> James Bellinger via Mono-devel-list <mono-devel-list at lists.dot.net> 11/30/16 11:15 AM >>>
    Well, *they* could switch. My own platform specific libraries do 
    detection. Anything else just ends up with lots of vaguely shareable, 
    similar, but unshared code. In practice what it means is a developer is 
    going to forget to package anything but the Windows version. That may be 
    the idea. Making the library *just work*, without the developer having 
    to worry about platforms, is best.
    
    I have two libraries I maintain that support both .NET Framework and 
    .NET Micro Framework (and Arduino -- libraries for embedded devices), 
    and due to how Microsoft ended up putting things in different 
    assemblies, even the same classes, it's a cluttered #ifdef mess. Some 
    are missing this overload or that. I have to have separate solution 
    files. In the future I'll probably just ditch Micro Framework support. 
    It's terrible, a hassle to maintain, and even more of a hassle to 
    support, debug and test.
    
    It's probably better to pull Microsoft out of the mud as best as 
    possible instead of sinking with them.
    
    James
    
    
    On 11/29/2016 10:56 PM, Miguel de Icaza wrote:
    > Hello Jerod,
    >
    >
    >     Question as a followup:
    >
    >     "This means that some of the work that we will have to do will
    >     involve either adjusting the CoreFX code to work in the way that
    >     Mono works, or give up on our tradition of having the same
    >     assemblies work across all platforms"
    >
    >     Is there a preference/leaning one way or another on that point
    >     yet, or is it still being investigated?
    >
    >
    > We will have to explore this when we get there.
    >
    > My personal preference is to use the Mono model, but the maintainers 
    > of CoreFX likely have their own personal preference to keep their 
    > model and they own that code, so we might have to either get creative 
    > with the solution that glues CoreFX code in Mono, or adjust Mono.   
    > Neither is easy :-)
    >
    > Miguel.
    >
    >
    > _______________________________________________
    > Mono-devel-list mailing list
    > Mono-devel-list at lists.dot.net
    > https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.dot.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fmono-devel-list&data=02%7C01%7Cmiguel%40microsoft.com%7Cecaf8011460b4df4ebf508d41960b7a0%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636161350583670419&sdata=u2HZERXqSJB1%2BuLiFTbX9Lk2dp7zX4pgPhcI%2FnA0vTM%3D&reserved=0
    
    
    
    _______________________________________________
    Mono-devel-list mailing list
    Mono-devel-list at lists.dot.net
    https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flists.dot.net%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fmono-devel-list&data=02%7C01%7Cmiguel%40microsoft.com%7Cecaf8011460b4df4ebf508d41960b7a0%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636161350583670419&sdata=u2HZERXqSJB1%2BuLiFTbX9Lk2dp7zX4pgPhcI%2FnA0vTM%3D&reserved=0