[Mono-list] .dll .exe ?

[Jaroslaw Kowalski]

I think that DLL extension makes some sense, because "Dynamically Linked
Library" seems to explain the file contents pretty well.

It is way better than SO - "Shared Object" - on Unix/Linux, because the term
"Object" has a totally different meaning in CLI world.

.DNA can be confusing because the acronym is already established (remember
the human genome project?).
Besides, it refers to a trademarked technology (Dot Net) not the CLI which
is a standard.

Can you explain your idea about RNA? What's wrong with *.netmodule?

I think MS could make it all consistent by renaming *.dll to *.assembly (not
the *.asm because it is a assembly-language source code). I think that
*.exe's should remain intact and there should be either wrappers that remove
extensions or binfmt_misc to facilitate their use under Linux.

Just my 0.02 PLN

Jarek

----- Original Message -----
From: "Thong (Tum) Nguyen" <tum@veridicus.com>
To: "'Miguel de Icaza'" <miguel@ximian.com>
Cc: "'juan'" <jcb@niluge.net>; <mono-list@ximian.com>
Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 5:18 AM
Subject: RE: [Mono-list] .dll .exe ?


> Hi Miguel,
>
> I agree that it made sense for Microsoft to use the DLL "vessel" format.
> I just don't see why they needed to keep the "DLL" file extension.
> Nothing about windows prevents DLLs from having different file
> extensions and as I noted, many DLLs on windows do actually use
> different file extensions :-).
>
> I'm still campaigning for .DNA for libraries and .RNA for modules.  Not
> sure what the extension for executables should be yet :-).
>
> ^Tum
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: mono-list-admin@lists.ximian.com [mailto:mono-list-
> > admin@lists.ximian.com] On Behalf Of Miguel de Icaza
> > Sent: Thursday, 19 June 2003 8:08 a.m.
> > To: Thong (Tum) Nguyen
> > Cc: 'juan'; mono-list@ximian.com
> > Subject: RE: [Mono-list] .dll .exe ?
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > > I'll never understand why Microsoft used the .DLL extension.  Even
> > > pre-dotnet dlls didn't always use .DLL (e.g. ActiveX controls use
> .OCX
> > > and control panel applets used .CPL).
> >
> > In .NET you can mix managed and unmanaged code into the same assembly
> > (Managed C++ can do this for example).  So you can actually have mixed
> > assemblies, so it makes sense to reuse the "vesel" format.
> > _______________________________________________
> > Mono-list maillist  -  Mono-list@lists.ximian.com
> > http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mono-list maillist  -  Mono-list@lists.ximian.com
> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
>