[Mono-list] laus stultitia

[Michael Poole]

Hans Van Wesenbeeck writes:

> > Would you clarify whether you complain about the use of
> > jargon, or the use of the technology it describes?

> The terminology that is being adopted, without questioning the
> motivations behind the technology it describes. My question is really
> how a technology that once again finds its justification in the
> dissemination of software in binary form can be compatible with an open
> source model, especially when this dissemination model results in an
> incredible penalty in terms of performance and complexity, leave alone
> the effort it takes to bring it about. I question the meaningfulness and
> motivation behind JIT compilation and dissemination of software in
> bytecode format.  

Source code portability on a weakly specified platform is not a
smaller complexity problem than bytecode portability -- it is
demonstrably *more* of a problem.  You can easily find articles on
performance that argue either for or against bytecode.

You are not raising issues with the terms being used; you are raising
issues with the platform.  Bytecode vs source code distribution is an
advocacy issue, and probably doesn't belong on the (usually technical
rather than political) Mono mailing list.

Michael