Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Microsoft To Open-Source .NET, Bring It Officially To Linux

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #51
    Originally posted by Michael_S View Post
    Agreed. I don't know why Google is letting Android sit on Java 6 when Java 8 is so much nicer.
    Probably because it's a ton of work. Java 8 took many, many years to come out, mostly because of the huge changes required inside the JVM to support all those nice features. And so to implement Java 8 on Android, Google would need to make equivalently large changes to their own VM.

    Further, it'll require a compatibility break, since any applications using Java 8 syntax wouldn't run on the existing VMs - and because of the problems Android has with updating devices to newer platform versions, that basically means that those apps won't run on the majority of existing devices.

    Comment


    • #52
      Originally posted by Delgarde View Post
      Probably because it's a ton of work. Java 8 took many, many years to come out, mostly because of the huge changes required inside the JVM to support all those nice features. And so to implement Java 8 on Android, Google would need to make equivalently large changes to their own VM.

      Further, it'll require a compatibility break, since any applications using Java 8 syntax wouldn't run on the existing VMs - and because of the problems Android has with updating devices to newer platform versions, that basically means that those apps won't run on the majority of existing devices.
      I think your second reason carries a lot more weight than the first. That's probably the complete answer.

      ... which disappoints me. Java 6 is no prize. Maybe the best hope for ending developer nightmares is cross-platform toolkits written in other languages, like Xamarin and (as polarathene already mentioned) Haxe.

      Comment


      • #53
        Originally posted by Kemosabe View Post
        Can someone explain me please: How is this beneficial for Microsoft? Why are they doing this?
        Two words: copyrightable APIs. If the US Supreme Court doesn't overturn the ruling that awards Oracle the copyright over the entire Java API, Oracle will have exactly that, and you'll witness an exile of scared developers fearing copyright prosecution just by programming for Java. .NET wants to be a non hostile destination, and that's why it's licensed with a MIT license.

        BTW, if the Supreme Court overturns that ruling, expect a reversal. It's MS, after all.

        Comment


        • #54
          I so wish that open sourcing their .NET platform also included their C++/clr:safe compiler. That thing is awesome. Not only does it provide local automatic variables, but it also provides auto_handle<T> allowing for deterministic cleanup (via a kind of RAII) that actually makes it possible to rely on patterns that a typical GC language cannot support. Sure it generates some of the most hacky IL known to man, but the high level C++ code looks pretty elegant

          Comment


          • #55
            Will that have an impact on Unity3D? I've heard they want to replace c# because of license.
            What means server stuff? Could I build a normal c# desktop app on Linux?
            Thanks

            Comment


            • #56
              Originally posted by mike4 View Post
              Will that have an impact on Unity3D? I've heard they want to replace c# because of license.
              if they choose to take advantage it'll be huge for them

              Originally posted by mike4 View Post
              What means server stuff?
              What was released with this announcement was RyuJIT, and their implementations of .NET Core, and .NET Frameworks (So in other words the CLR). This combined with Roslyn being open sourced a few months ago means that the .NET stack is now completely open source under permissive licenses, and under patent grant. The official .NET stack + Entity Framework and ASP.NET being open source means that their .NET server stuff is all open

              What's not open is their implementation of WinForms, WPF, and WinRT, and while in theory they could end up eventually releasing them, I really don't see them doing that. If for nothing else they're too tied down to windows internals.

              Originally posted by mike4 View Post
              Could I build a normal c# desktop app on Linux?
              Thanks
              You already could do that you just have to use GTK#, although whenever ddobrev finished Qt# you'll have that available too.

              Comment


              • #57
                Originally posted by mike4 View Post
                What means server stuff? Could I build a normal c# desktop app on Linux?
                Thanks
                You could, yes. Using e.g. a GTK+ GUI.

                I hope this OSS effort will make .NET apps on Linux as fast as on Windows. Mono is currently quite slow. Then it would make F# more attractive.

                Comment


                • #58
                  Originally posted by oleid View Post
                  I hope this OSS effort will make .NET apps on Linux as fast as on Windows. Mono is currently quite slow. Then it would make F# more attractive.
                  Given that it'll be the same C#/VB to IL Compiler (Roslyn), the same CLR implementation(.NET Core), same Frameworks implementation (.NET Frameworks), and the same JITer (RyuJIT) I would certainly hope they'd perform the same.

                  Comment


                  • #59
                    Originally posted by asavah View Post
                    systemd-dotnetd please!
                    Nooo! Don't give them ideas!

                    Comment


                    • #60
                      Do we get VisualStudio for Linux?

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X