Mono 2.8 Is Out With C# 4.0, Better Performance

[BlackStar]

Kdenlive is debatable however I agree with Amarok.

C++ is better than C for desktop applications. C is better for super-reliable server applications.

I thought servers were the province of Java?

[Togga]

If you expect to read only from people who agree with you, you may be disappointed. Get a life.

Why is it, that all you Mono missionaries always has to be defensive and rude.

And regarding Tomboy/Gnote, why is it when someone does the hard work to make an application leaner and meaner with less baggage, that you, the application authors and others has to bash it.

http://lwn.net/Articles/331187/

The fine and godd OSS spirits are lacking in the Mono world. Instead they are chanting like a MS TE. That is sad.

[V!NCENT]

Can the microtards please get a notion of hisrory before they put a stamp on us freetards? You can start by Googling 'SCO', 'The yellow read to cairo', 'embrace, extent and extinguish', 'TomTom Fat Microsoft lawsuit', 'Linux car patent Microsoft FUD', 'Novell Microsoft Grocklaw' and 'Microsoft antitrust'.

When you're done waking up, tell me again that Linux needs Mono.

[movieman]

C++ is better than C for desktop applications. C is better for super-reliable server applications.

Why would anyone use C for a 'super-reliable application' when it has even more reliability issues than C++? Destructors and STL are vastly superior to manual memory management in C, if you don't want your server to crash every month because one route through the C code forgot to free the allocated memory when a structure is no longer used.

[kraftman]

When you're done waking up, tell me again that Linux needs Mono.

After reading some comments at lwn (thanks to Togga for the link) I have the feeling mono is just an Aprils fools joke made by Novell to show how much c# sucks! C# apps suffer from hard to track memory leaks and one guy ported entire mono application (tomboy) to C++ in his free time. This is funny, because Novell evangelists said:

Tomboy is not going away, and it will continue to be developed on the extremely productive Mono/GTK# language platform.

Damn, it's so extremely productive that one developer can port c# application to C++ in a short time. F-spot also served as an application made using extremely productive platform, so it was ported to another language too. I'd ask Novell why didn't they write Photoshop or some appealing game and while Mono is so extremely productive platform then what are they waiting for?!

[BlackStar]

Damn, it's so extremely productive that one developer can trivially implement that which took Gimp around a decade to fix: dockable panels.

[Hephasteus]

Can the microtards please get a notion of hisrory before they put a stamp on us freetards? You can start by Googling 'SCO', 'The yellow read to cairo', 'embrace, extent and extinguish', 'TomTom Fat Microsoft lawsuit', 'Linux car patent Microsoft FUD', 'Novell Microsoft Grocklaw' and 'Microsoft antitrust'.

When you're done waking up, tell me again that Linux needs Mono.

Do I have to approach this situation firmly grounded in reality when some divorced ideological approach can make enemies friends right up till they are stabbed in the back.

[V!NCENT]

Do I have to approach this situation firmly grounded in reality when some divorced ideological approach can make enemies friends right up till they are stabbed in the back.

This took me a while to inderstand, but now that I do, I can only say to you; well spoken

[NoEffex]

Why would anyone use C for a 'super-reliable application' when it has even more reliability issues than C++? Destructors and STL are vastly superior to manual memory management in C, if you don't want your server to crash every month because one route through the C code forgot to free the allocated memory when a structure is no longer used.

If there's a bug in the C++ compiler then it will crash.

Basically, it's because there's more control. Simplicity = (Or has a lot to do with) Reliability 99999 times out of 100000

[movieman]

If there's a bug in the C++ compiler then it will crash.

If there's a bug in the C compiler then it will crash. And odds are you're using gcc for both.

Basically, it's because there's more control. Simplicity = (Or has a lot to do with) Reliability 99999 times out of 100000

So if you want 'control' why are you using C rather than assembler? That's simpler and gives you total control and hence must be more reliable, right?

Most crashes in C are due to duff pointers, buffer overflows and incorrect memory management through malloc and free; C++ has features to drastically reduce those problems, so any substantial program which uses them is likely to be more robust in C++ than C.