[Mono-list] Binaries naming

[Asier Llano Palacios]

But they would have hardcoded the "ilasm.exe".
So a simlink from "ilasm" or "ilasm.exe" to milasm could also work.

Asier

> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: mono-list-admin@lists.ximian.com [mailto:mono-list-
> admin@lists.ximian.com] En nombre de Daniel Morgan
> Enviado el: martes, 14 de octubre de 2003 19:05
> Para: Pavlica, Nick; Asier Llano Palacios
> CC: Mono List
> Asunto: RE: [Mono-list] Binaries naming
> 
> For milasm, it would not work because there are some compilers that have
> ilasm hard-coded.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mono-list-admin@lists.ximian.com
> [mailto:mono-list-admin@lists.ximian.com]On Behalf Of Pavlica, Nick
> Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 12:53 PM
> To: Asier Llano Palacios
> Cc: Mono List
> Subject: Re: [Mono-list] Binaries naming
> 
> 
> I like this suggestion!  This naming consistency would have definitely
> made my first experience with Mono better because it would have helped
> reduce the learning curve.  And in my opinion, any time you can build in
> consistency it's a good thing.  Just look at some of the problems with
> swing/awt :)
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, 2003-10-14 at 05:12, Asier Llano Palacios wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I've bin thinking about the names of the executables and found the
> following
> > two cosmetic problems.
> >
> > a) Unconsistent naming, some of the including an 'm' at the beginning,
> some
> > of them 'mono' and some of them nothing at all.
> > 	mcs: for the compiler
> > 	mono: for the jit
> > 	mint: for the interpreter
> > 	ilasm: for the assembler
> > 	monodis: for the disassembler
> > 	monodoc: for the documentation
> > 	....
> >
> > b) Distributions make pnet and mono block each other just because of
> sharing
> > the name of 'ilasm'. Although I'm not a fan of pnet it is a pity to
> block
> > each other for sharing just the name of one executable.
> >
> > c) Windows people ask for tools that already exist, because they don't
> know
> > the mono's name of the same tool. (I was thinking about a mail asking
> for
> > the disassembler).
> >
> > I know that it would be a little change in source, but a big change in
> the
> > documentation, in the working of the people and packaging. But, I was
> > thinking that if the change is proposed, the sooner, the better.
> > (Once Mono 1.0 is released, it is clearly too late).
> >
> > Just I was thinking that it would be better if for Mono 1.0 the
> executables
> > would be called:
> > 	mcsc: for the compiler
> > 	mjit: for the jit
> > 	mint: for the interpreter
> > 	milasm: for the assembler
> > 	mdoc: for the documentation
> > 	....
> >
> > I think it would make everything more consistent and easier for people
> to
> > start working with mono.
> > Don't you think it would look as a more organized framework?
> >
> > I know it would be a hard job, so don't blame me just for thinking. I'm
> open
> > to hear your thoughts.
> >
> > Asier Llano
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Mono-list maillist  -  Mono-list@lists.ximian.com
> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list