[Mono-list] Mono, do NOT run after Microsoft !!
trampster at gmail.com
Sun Sep 30 20:24:52 UTC 2012
I use a .net 4.0 features in widemargin, because they improve
the language and make developing easier.
I would not support any regression in features compared to microsoft .net
Doing so would also make it difficult to use mono for cross platform
On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 8:34 AM, Dave Curylo <curylod at asme.org> wrote:
> This looks like a flame bait message that was stuck in your outbox since
> 2006. Did you just fire up Netscape Mail on your XT Turbo?
> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 9:00 AM, linustd <iamybj at hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Microsoft add new features into C# and .net again and again.
>> More and more developers begin doubting .net and C#.
>> The down of Myspace proves that .net/Windows is not a good choice.
> Do you mean the power outage that took down data centers that hosted
> myspace in 2006? I don't know many languages that are resilient to power
> failures, but you are correct, I don't think C# or .NET intends to provide
> much advantage here. Or are you talking about something else relevant that
> has occurred with myspace recently?
>> I think, Mono should not continue run after Microsoft, .net 2.0 is enough.
> I don't think it runs after Microsoft. It is a community supported
> implementation of the CLR and the C# language, and follows the same
> language specification that Microsoft does, so you can expect some
> similarities. You should also note that the mono framework in general
> supports things that Microsoft's implementation does not, such as a POSIX
> implementation layer for running CLR applications on POSIX compliant
> systems such as Linux and UNIX, a messaging layer that integrates with
> RabbitMQ instead of MSMQ, a scriptable csharp shell, etc. If the mono
> community feels it should create functionality to add to the framework,
> there is an open path to contribution, and quite often, Mono includes
> components in the framework that were not built directly by the core Mono
>> At .net 2.0 version , Microsoft finish the .net platform building. Since
>> version 2.0, Microsoft's main work on .net is to build new components
> Since 2006 when you wrote this email, there have been a few .NET and C#
> language releases, such as 3.0, 4.0, 5.0. These included features like
> implicitly declared types, lambda expressions, dynamic language support,
> async language support, and so on. Other languages have also added similar
> features, or have plans to in the near future, such as Java 8 coming in
> 2013 that will support the same sort of lambdas that C# introduced in 2006.
> Just because Java is also going to have lambda support probably doesn't
> mean it is chasing Microsoft either, but simply wants to provide support
> for language features that it's developer community have come to expect. I
> don't think many languages would survive for very long if they don't
> continue to grow and evolve to support the needs of their developers.
>> Platform Independent is not practical for a technology that is hold a
>> private company like Microsoft.
> That's an odd statement. It is true that Microsoft doesn't make a
> tremendous effort to make .NET platform independent (that's what mono does,
> remember?), but they have come around in the past few years (while this
> email has been stuck in your outbox) with an appreciation for the open
> source community. They have made some large frameworks open source, many
> of which are included in Mono due to the efforts of the Mono community.
> These probably didn't exist back in 2006, but the ASP.NET MVC framework
> and the Entity Framework are two tremendous frameworks that Microsoft has
> made open source.
> Why would such contributions be practical? Well, this also didn't exist in
> 2006, but Microsoft has a cloud service called Azure, and they have an
> opportunity to make money off of their Azure services whether they run on
> Windows or not. In fact, there is a great amount of support for
> non-Microsoft technologies, like Java, PHP, and even Linux VM's that can
> support Mono. Microsoft really doesn't care too much if your running under
> Azure directly or inside a Windows VM or inside a Linux VM - the money they
> make from their infrastructure spends the same.
>> I recommend that, mono should only implement C# 2.0, and do a little
>> modify. And mono and mnodevelop should not support so many languages like
>> C\C++\VB. Mono and Monodevelop should only support one language c# 2.0.
> This was a reasonable position in 2006. Now, I suggest we take it a little
> further and only implement C# 5.0, at least until the 6.0 spec comes out.
> Don't get me wrong, generics are awesome, but I wouldn't stop there when
> implicit declaration and lambdas can provide such productivity improvements.
> I probably wouldn't do "a little modify" though, because then you have
> some weird implementation of a language that only runs on one framework. I
> think the goal of Mono is probably to maintain cross platform compatibility
> wherever possible.
> Hey, what do you think about supporting F#? Is it a bad idea to support
> that? What about IronPython, Boo, Scala, or, well, Java (via IKVM)? Why do
> you think it's a bad idea to support all of these languages? What about
> the developers who actively use these languages on the mono runtime? I
> guess maybe we should just convert everything to C# 2.0, but to be honest,
> it's going to take a while even to convert all my C# 4 code to run under C#
>> Mono should focus its energy on high performance and platform independent
> I think it does. You can read about such things at
>> Anders is not a master, he is just a senior developer. His level and state
>> of mind is so low.
> This seems like an odd place to make a personal attack on Anders. I think
> you should go to a C# language conference and provide him some guidance as
> I've never seen him post here. Please, though, read up on C# 3, 4, and 5
> before you do so you can really contribute some insight to the discussions
> on all the purported missteps made in the last several years.
>> If you want to build a new world, you must be a master, not a workman.
> Indeed. Hey, it sounds like you've got some experience designing some
> pretty nice languages. I'm kind of a languages geek myself. Can I try one
> of yours?
>> Let's make mono a "C# 2.0 without Microsoft"
> I think it is. I think you might want to at least maybe read the first
> paragraph on http://www.mono-project.com/What_is_Mono
> I am running C# 2.0 on RHEL, CentOS, Ubuntu, Mac OS X, and my Raspberry
> Pi, to which Microsoft didn't really contribute a whole lot. I've run mono
> for everything from large scale enterprise applications to websites to
> video games. It performs great, runs everywhere. And in cases where I need
> to, it's nice that I can also run all of this on Windows, because you know
> the saying, nobody ever got fired for running Microsoft back in 2006, am I
> Anyway, I've got to get back to a Sunday afternoon hack fest. I hope your
> flame war goes well. Congrats on getting that old clunker of a machine
> back up and running! You might want to check your sent items (or whatever
> they were called in 2006) to see if any other zany messages went out.
>> View this message in context:
>> Sent from the Mono - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>> Mono-list maillist - Mono-list at lists.ximian.com
> Mono-list maillist - Mono-list at lists.ximian.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Mono-list