Re: GNOME, .Net and Mono

[Tomasz Kłoczko <kloczek rudy mif pg gda pl>]

On 4 Feb 2002, Miguel de Icaza wrote:

> 
> > A very legitimate reason not to want to use .NET is it being based on a
> > new, largely untried VM - if the goal really was to go with a VM, then
> > there are much older, tried and quite probbaly in the mid-term, better VMs
> > around than Mono. And this isn't a plug for java - its use of a VM is
> > nothing new.
> 
> There are a few bits in the .NET VM (from here on referred as the CLI)
> that make it intereting:
> 
> 	* Support for ValueTypes (a value type is a struct, or any kind
> 	  of contiguous memory).  Required for supporting languages like
> 	  C and C++ who use structs and allocate arrays of structs.
> 
> 	* Pointer support.  This is required to implement languages like
> 	  C, C++, Fortran, Cobol and Pascal.
> 
> 	* Tail calls.  Required to implement efficiently things like
> 	  Lisp and Haskell.

Miguel .. forgive me my ignorancy and not so good english. GNOME was
developed mainly without this kind "bloat" languages like C++, Haskel,
Lisp (God why sawmill is so huge ? .. God blease AS programmers ;) and
this is *very good* fundament.
Now You want say we me must change this now and try to kill this work in 
way which is performed by KDE team ?
Simple .. why ? I don't see around any valuable products ("Open Products")
which uses this programing enviroment. Why now we must change this and for
perform "another way" for grow compecity ? Is it realy *neccessary* ?

> There was a lot of feedback from language vendors to Microsoft on
> features that were needed to implement their compilers to target this
> platform.  

OK if Microsoft will see anything valueable in GNOME why Bill not try
invest own programers for make .NET code for GNOME ? For me this looks
like You want say we must prepare some code olny because "Microssoft exist
somewhere" ? Why we sill can't continue development for prepare what *we*
need ? This like never won figting. IMHO if someone is thinkinfg about
wining with MS (not just me) IMHO best way is ignore this firm on proper
level and prepare something in "so best way as possible".

Now (slowly) with gnumeric and few other programs I can live without MS
products aroud in growing and comfortable way. Probalby many GNOME
programers was invest own time and talent for allow themeselve relize
effective enviroment for allow materialize this kind target with only
minimal compatibility area with "other enviroments" in so simple way as
possible. Think .. how many from as now are thinking on MS and
consequences existing this firm ? Realy so many ? How many from as was
trying to develop sometring because "MS have someting" ? realy so many ?
or how many from as was tring develop GNOME for have only (and simple)
"good tool (TM)" ? IMHO *many* .. many from as was develop many things not
because "MS have this" but "because this proper way" with looking on MS
and/or *only* for consult/test own ideas is it correct or not (?) and
*nothing* more.

Simple IMHO tryimg adopt .NET now is like tring write program in Fortran
using C language. Yes, we kwon it is possible but we know it is not best
way because if you are writing C program best way for this is using C
programing rules :_)

I'm optmist and I think probably in next few month somebody will show how
GNOME can be continue extending without .NET and in way much better than
.NET .. only if it realy neccassary (maybe .. You :) Now before GNOME is
release 2.0 .. IMHO it is not good time for thinking on so radical
movements. Yes, it is good time for discuss how to prepare some elements
for develop some functionalities but I don't think .NET is best whaat we
need :) Maybe some aspect .NET technology are good .. maybe .. but probaby
not all. Maybe using on some places VM will be good not still not at all
places. Haskel, Lisp, C++ .. sorry not for me because this allow develop
some things in simplet way but not some simple and soe faster way as I can
imagine. I want develp harder but more effective/faster/smaller
executables. IMHO thinking on .NET will be good thinking like way like on
current ORBit on begining. Before ORBit we have OLE as target, few CORBA
implemntations as base *but* after this all was redeveped and now we have
ORBit, bonobo and few other things which brings some functionalities in
*much* bettter way than origins. KDE team some time ago was tring
incorporate mico without deeper redeveloping. And what ? Nothig. Mico was
droped and now IMHO KDE is without good alternatives for this. Why all
this ? Because ORBit is *only* neccessary subset orginal functionalities
prepared with "*I* need this" and nothing more in mind .. not because
"some language vendors to Microsoft need this".

regards

kloczek
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------
*Ludzie nie mają problemów, tylko sobie sami je stwarzają*
-----------------------------------------------------------
Tomasz Kłoczko, sys adm @zie.pg.gda.pl|*e-mail: kloczek rudy mif pg gda pl*