| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Interview: Miguel de Icaza (DesktopLinux.com)Interview: Miguel de Icaza (DesktopLinux.com)Posted Oct 10, 2008 13:26 UTC (Fri) by dgm (subscriber, #49227)In reply to: Interview: Miguel de Icaza (DesktopLinux.com) by kripkenstein Parent article: Interview: Miguel de Icaza (DesktopLinux.com)
Maybe someone should start a porting tool?
Something that uses the mono C# parser to generate Java source. Microsoft already has one (or used to), which obviously works the other way. Even better would be a bytecode translator, but that would require to re-implement the .NET class libraries (a la Wine). That would be a useful project for those wanting to break the lock-in.
(Log in to post comments)
Interview: Miguel de Icaza (DesktopLinux.com) Posted Oct 10, 2008 13:40 UTC (Fri) by zlynx (subscriber, #2285) [Link]
Did you just say, in a thread about Mono, that someone should write a .NET porting tool and re-implement .NET class libraries in order to break the lock-in?
That is what Mono IS! A bytecode interpreter and JIT for MS CLR and a reimplementation of .NET class libraries.
Interview: Miguel de Icaza (DesktopLinux.com) Posted Oct 11, 2008 11:23 UTC (Sat) by dgm (subscriber, #49227) [Link]
There's a difference: a porting tool allows you to let .NET behind once the port is done.
Interview: Miguel de Icaza (DesktopLinux.com) Posted Oct 13, 2008 18:11 UTC (Mon) by epa (subscriber, #39769) [Link]
Uh, yes, and Mono lets you leave .NET behind once you have ported your
application to Mono. There are no dependencies on Microsoft proprietary code whatsoever. What exactly do you have in mind?
|
|
||||||||||||