Slashdot Mirror

Languages are arbitrary, one can create compilers for any language to run on any platform(s), its a matter of taking the symantics of the language, and using a lexer and parser to generate intermediate code, which then can be translated to assembly code for the target platform (of course there is more to an actual compiler). So just saying that a language is not PRO because of limitations to the OS, which actually is not true for C#, is ignorant. Maybe you are just knocking M$ and trying to troll, but take a look at the Mono Platforms if you want to know more.

I happen to use GTK+ to run both The Gimp and Gaim on XP, so the overhead isn't that big a deal. I even sat there and downloaded Gaim with GTK+ over 33.6kbps dialup. The whole point is that the Windows ports of these toolkits give cross-platform compatability; win32 defines cross-platform as "other versions of Windows."*

For instance, you have the option of downloading the .NET framework which Microsoft touts as the alternative to Java (and in some ways it is), but that is 23.1 MB for v1.1 and 22.4 MB for v2.0, and this doesn't even include the Windows Installer you might have to upgrade first. How about that overhead?


*Microsoft's .NET has some amount of compatability with other platforms too thanks to Mono, but why not opt for a truly cross-platform toolkit?

Not every .NET library can be rewritten without patent licensing from Microsoft.

Yes they can if Microsoft has already granted a permissive patent license on the core components of the .NET framework, namely those which have been submitted to ECMA. If it turns out that System.Windows.Forms is encumbered, that just means that all new apps will be developed on Gtk# instead.

Web services are excellent supported in C# (much better than anything I know of in Java), and according to the Mono docs they are supported there as well. From http://www.mono-project.com/Webservices_and_GtkSha rp:

using System;
using System.Web;
using System.Web.Services;

namespace GtkWebservice
{
        [WebService (Description="Our first web service")]
        public class RemoteWebService : System.Web.Services.WebService
        {
                [WebMethod (Description="Adds two numbers")]
                public int Add (int firstNumber, int secondNumber)
                {
                        return firstNumber + secondNumber;
                }
        }
}


These lines of code will be able to generate all the plumming neccesary to expose a web service (automagically creating WSDL files and such).

Consuming services is also extremely easy. See http://www.mono-project.com/Web_Services for an example of creating a proxy class from a WSDL file.

Web services are excellent supported in C# (much better than anything I know of in Java), and according to the Mono docs they are supported there as well. From http://www.mono-project.com/Webservices_and_GtkSha rp:

using System;
using System.Web;
using System.Web.Services;

namespace GtkWebservice
{
        [WebService (Description="Our first web service")]
        public class RemoteWebService : System.Web.Services.WebService
        {
                [WebMethod (Description="Adds two numbers")]
                public int Add (int firstNumber, int secondNumber)
                {
                        return firstNumber + secondNumber;
                }
        }
}


These lines of code will be able to generate all the plumming neccesary to expose a web service (automagically creating WSDL files and such).

Consuming services is also extremely easy. See http://www.mono-project.com/Web_Services for an example of creating a proxy class from a WSDL file.

I've already found it's ability to use libraries from multiple sources very helpful, I've used a DLL written in VS .NET 2003 that had no consideration for Linux yet it works perfectly. Mono also allows you to run Java code in the Mono environment but also allows you to use the .NET stuff (and other code you write in C# etc) in Java! That flexibility to me is very impressive, it's well worth checking out.

As for the main topic, both C# and Java are just languages. Programming is a lot about knowing how to think about a problem rather than the actual syntax. If you can conceptualise how to tackle a problem in a programmatic way that's half the job of a programmer. Learning the language itself is a secondary task and you can pickup a working knowledge of most languages within a few days.

Don't limit yourself to just one language to be an expert in, it'll limit your ability to be employed down the track. Looking at C# and Java however are good choices, if you know how to program in C you'll wonder why it took you so long!

http://www.mono-project.com/Java
I just tried it out a few minutes ago.
From the URL:
"Mono is able to run Java code side-by-side with .NET as well as having Java and .NET object interoperate with each other."

C# a work of the devil? Uhm. Mono anyone?

I like C# but I've been doing it all using Mono which does allow C# and .NET to be used across multiple platforms just the same as Java. Don't just limit yourself to Microsoft's implementation of C#, using Mono allows you to build some pretty powerful applications quite quickly (using Glade and GTK for the GUI side of it).

This is interesting because it already supports (albeit incompletely) more languages than .Net and is a whole hell of a lot newer

I'm all for another multi-language VM, especially if it's built from the ground up for dynamic typing, but you're joking about the languages, right?

I count 33 Parrot Languages (including duplicates) but only 15 that have ANY tests (even ones that fail).

Of all the lists that I checked, the only one that short was the one for the Mono Project (and they list 13)...

I mean, it's certainly fair to claim that Parrot is newer, if by newer you mean "still not done" (at the current rate, we might see .NET 3 before Parrot 1.0), or "released a beta most recently" (0.4 came out JUST after .NET 2 went gold). But to say it has more languages is just ignorant.

This isn't very interesting at all.

You can compile a java-program and run it under Mono.
Eclipse runs under Mono.
See: http://www.go-mono.com/images/ikvm-screenshot.png

As the distinction between Java, .NET and Mono seems to be unclear to a few people, I'll throw in my "humble view":

• Mono supports several langauges, that easily interoperate. Java supports one langugage.
  You can write in support for other languages in Java, like Jython, but this is not the point.
  A compiled function written in Boo can easily be called from C#.
  See: http://www.mono-project.com/Languages
  
  
• Mono has a compiler, VM, and a bunch of classes that are all As Free As They Can Be (tm).
  In addition, Mono has re-implemented a few microsoft-specific classes, that can easily be removed, where there supposedely is an incredibly tiny chance that anyone will care. If you're making Linux-only programs, this will never be an issue for you, and you'll have a very nice and powerful tool for making programs with.
  See: http://www.mono-project.com/FAQ:_General
  
  
• It's easy to call .dll's and .so's from Mono. For what I know, It's not that easy from Java. I tried calling some dlls a few years ago, and it was a mess. For me, at least, the threshold for calling a function from libsomething.so from Java is a lot higher than from Mono. Especially if you're planning on doing this in a crossplattform way, which Mono has support for. You can call the native .so on Linux and the native .dll on windows, with the same program.
  See: http://www.linuxgazette.com/node/8794
  
  
• Python supposedly runs faster under IronPython (which runs on Mono) than normal python (CPython).
  See: http://www.python.org/pycon/dc2004/papers/9/
  

Regardless of my list of points above, I hope you'll see that Novell could very well be "reinforcing their commitment to the Java community, while at the same time funding Mono".

This isn't very interesting at all.

You can compile a java-program and run it under Mono.
Eclipse runs under Mono.
See: http://www.go-mono.com/images/ikvm-screenshot.png

As the distinction between Java, .NET and Mono seems to be unclear to a few people, I'll throw in my "humble view":

• Mono supports several langauges, that easily interoperate. Java supports one langugage.
  You can write in support for other languages in Java, like Jython, but this is not the point.
  A compiled function written in Boo can easily be called from C#.
  See: http://www.mono-project.com/Languages
  
  
• Mono has a compiler, VM, and a bunch of classes that are all As Free As They Can Be (tm).
  In addition, Mono has re-implemented a few microsoft-specific classes, that can easily be removed, where there supposedely is an incredibly tiny chance that anyone will care. If you're making Linux-only programs, this will never be an issue for you, and you'll have a very nice and powerful tool for making programs with.
  See: http://www.mono-project.com/FAQ:_General
  
  
• It's easy to call .dll's and .so's from Mono. For what I know, It's not that easy from Java. I tried calling some dlls a few years ago, and it was a mess. For me, at least, the threshold for calling a function from libsomething.so from Java is a lot higher than from Mono. Especially if you're planning on doing this in a crossplattform way, which Mono has support for. You can call the native .so on Linux and the native .dll on windows, with the same program.
  See: http://www.linuxgazette.com/node/8794
  
  
• Python supposedly runs faster under IronPython (which runs on Mono) than normal python (CPython).
  See: http://www.python.org/pycon/dc2004/papers/9/
  

Regardless of my list of points above, I hope you'll see that Novell could very well be "reinforcing their commitment to the Java community, while at the same time funding Mono".

"

• Do you fear that Microsoft will change the spec and render Mono useless?

No. Microsoft proved with the CLI and the C# language that it was possible to create a powerful foundation for many languages to inter-operate. We will always have that.

Even if changes happened in the platform which were undocumented, the existing platform would a value on its own.

 

• Could patents be used to completely disable Mono?

First some background information.

The .NET Framework is divided in two parts: the ECMA/ISO covered technologies and the other technologies developed on top of it like ADO.NET, ASP.NET and Windows.Forms.

Mono implements the ECMA/ISO covered parts, as well as being a project that aims to implement the higher level blocks like ASP.NET, ADO.NET and Windows.Forms. ...

The controversial elements are the ASP.NET, ADO.NET and Windows.Forms subsets. Those are convenient for people who need full compatibility with the Windows platform, but are not required for the open source Mono platform, nor integration with today's Mono's rich support of Linux. ...

Not providing a patented capability would weaken the interoperability, but it would still provide the free software / open source software community with good development tools, which is the primary reason for developing Mono.

"

I don't know the .NET ecosystem, so I don't know if there are any non-ms vendors pushing .NET based technologies.

There's actually several, but Mono is growing the most in popularity and is backed by Novell.

Much of the developer attention to Microsoft technologies would have been there with visual studio 7 even if .NET didn't exist.

Wrong. The whole point being Visual Studio 7 was to support the new .NET technologies. So much so that they dropped the popular pre-.NET Visual Basic in favor of a new .NET version of it.

Most coders these days fall into three buckets: Java developer, Web developer, .NET developer. See?

Wrong again. Most developers are spread all over the place as far as technologies they work with. One learns quickly that they'll be more efficient if the start off with the right tool for a particular job. Certainly most Java developers do, or have done, web development as well. I myself actively develop in both Java, C#, C/C++ (not as much), and PHP for various projects.

but as of today, MS can't expect .NET technologies to dominate the developer market.

Well of course not, captain obvious. The technology is relatively new compared to other established ones... but have you looked at the new crop of programming job offerings lately? .NET jobs have been increasing.

On the other hand, Java runs on Unix and Windows. Is there a working version of .NET for Solaris? Yes. http://www.mono-project.com/

It's clear I drink the kool-aid when I ask: are ReactOS and Mono/DotGNU viable alternatives which would allow you to continue using this hardware?

It may be an ECMA standard, but it could still be patented. IIRC, the ECMA / patent issue affect Mono as well. From the Mono FAQ : "The core of the .NET Framework, and what has been patented by Microsoft falls under the ECMA/ISO submission"

http://www.mono-project.com/Image:Nokia.jpg

Actually, there is. http://www.mono-project.com

No, that's their hope for Mono

Note: All but two of the projects (WorldWind and WorldWindow) now compile in Mono 1.1.9. So while a C# port would still not be trivial, it is a lot closer than it was in some earlier versions of Mono.

Plus we got a new version of Tao today (OpenGL binding for Mono/.NET)- http://www.mono-project.com/Tao

Despite what the zealots say, Mono is very impressive project. I would encourage anyone looking for a modern programming environment to look into it. They even have it working on a Nokia 770 now. See the last screenshot here http://www.mono-project.com/Screenshots

I like C# better than Java, but thats just a matter of choice. Java can be run on the Mono platform. They even have Eclipse working on it. How they got so far with this project in so little time, is astonishing. As the original poster said, there are a lot of side projects on the go, pushing the boundaries even further.

I couldn't care less, if Mono is based on a Microsoft project. Mono can stand up on it's own now, and in time, will surpass .Net in many areas, as they already have done with cross-platform, and non-MS bindings.

Lets just hope this has no effect on Mono. I'm amazed how far thay have come with the project. There are so meny sin-off projects now, it has to be taken seriously.

It's already underway, at least for the .NET (also known as "not nearly as bad as the older versions edition") version.

Not only do those people look like zealots, I believe you are one of them too. Either you are new here or you are a zealot. Because...

You can't run .NET on linux
You can't run ASP.NET on linux
There's not an Integrated Development Environment (IDE) for .NET on linux
There's no commercial support for .NET on linux

So I am betting you want to bash Novell too because they support .NET?

If you're developing OSS for .NET, kudos on being open source, but you do miss the bonus points for being platform independent and don't whine about not getting the cred platform-independent projects of the same nature do. If you're an OSS user who sees this great project built on a proprietary stack and are pissed because it's not available for your platform, "port up or shut up".

It's called Mono. Funny how that can run unmodified ASP.NET applications on Linux, Solaris, MacOS... very platform specific, that is.

It's just as easy, if not easier, to write cross-platform applications using .NET as with any other language or set of compilers. Stop being a troll.

What about 'Free' .NET apps?

If GPL software is like a virus, then Mono must be the kissing disease of free software :-)

This is blatantly incorrect. Mono has ASP.NET support, and works pretty well.

> Mono is not innovative. Mono is just a misguided open source implementation of proprietary crap.

False. http://mono-project.com/ECMA

Feel free to rant and rave about open standards (I love'em too:) but in this case you're pissing into the wind. C# and the CLR are slick as, so what they're M$ designed, the main C# man (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anders_Hejlsberg) knows his stuff.

As much as I hate to give MS props, C# is one of my favorite languages to program in.

Mono provides the necessary software to develop and run .NET client and server applications on Linux, Solaris, Mac OS X, Windows, and Unix

http://www.mono-project.com/Main_Page

Right, because those thousands of Linux servers are capable of running ASP .NET, which Microsoft uses extensively... Er, no.

Er, yes.

I don't know if Akamai's servers use Mono or not, but Linux in general (as well as BSD and Mac OS X) can run ASP.Net 1.1. I've used it successfully.

You've provided an old link to the page. The new one is http://www.mono-project.com/Windows_Forms

Mono has multiple licenses, depending on what part of the framework you are talking about.

http://www.mono-project.com/FAQ:_Licensing

There are a number of cross-platform commercial applications that run on Mono, for example:

* Novell's own iFolder client and servers (same code base, modulo UI which is native on each of the three platforms: Linux/Gtk, Windows/Winforms, Cocoa/OSX).

* (http:///www.medsphere.com) Medsphere's products (Mono/Gtk# based).

* Otee's Unity game engine (http://www.otee.dk/index.html).

You can look for the "Works with Mono" logo on open source .NET applications and various commercial applications.

For a larger but still incomplete list, see:
http://www.mono-project.com/Software

As for your question about what will happen when C# 2.0 comes out, we have good news, we already have implemented it (we are missing two fairly minimal features though), for details you can see our web page on the subject:

http://www.mono-project.com/CSharp_Compiler

Generics, itereators, anonymous methods, nullable types, partial classes, per-accessor modifiers, static classes, fixed buffers and co/contra-variant delegates are all implemented and available today.

And we can not wait to implement the new features in C# 3.0

Miguel.

There are a number of cross-platform commercial applications that run on Mono, for example:

* Novell's own iFolder client and servers (same code base, modulo UI which is native on each of the three platforms: Linux/Gtk, Windows/Winforms, Cocoa/OSX).

* (http:///www.medsphere.com) Medsphere's products (Mono/Gtk# based).

* Otee's Unity game engine (http://www.otee.dk/index.html).

You can look for the "Works with Mono" logo on open source .NET applications and various commercial applications.

For a larger but still incomplete list, see:
http://www.mono-project.com/Software

As for your question about what will happen when C# 2.0 comes out, we have good news, we already have implemented it (we are missing two fairly minimal features though), for details you can see our web page on the subject:

http://www.mono-project.com/CSharp_Compiler

Generics, itereators, anonymous methods, nullable types, partial classes, per-accessor modifiers, static classes, fixed buffers and co/contra-variant delegates are all implemented and available today.

And we can not wait to implement the new features in C# 3.0

Miguel.

I definatley agree, also, note that Gtk# is easily installed under windows.

GTK# looks clean under both platforms and the programs run without recompile.
There's also Glade#, an improvement over windows forms.

With the code generator for Glade#, it lets you split UI design from backend work which has worked so well for webforms and the like.

Mono implements System.Windows.Forms, but currently it's not stable.

It's recommended to use the latest build of Mono System.Windows.Forms, you can find it here.
And here is the the Mono WinForms class status.
I currently wouldn't rely on it. But the outlook is good.
And here are some pretty pictures of Mono's WinForms in action.

For apps where the both compatiblity with Windows and Linux/OSX are important I'd use wx.NET.
However on Win32 WinForms works best, even if it isn't the nicest (for developers) toolkit around.

The maemo guys are doing some amaizing things with this device. They have just ported over Mono amongst other things. Can't wait for mine to arrive.

I've been writing C# for about 6 months now and have not touched Microsoft software. What you say? That's right, I've been using Mono.

You've obviously never heard of Mono...

The entire "proposal" seems to me is an attempt bump the stock price up so they can sell off. I seriously doubt they have the best interests of the corporation in mind. Their proposal has shades of recent HP management -- hitting short term goals (Profit!!), while ignoring the long term health of the company.

As for Novell R&D, they've got iFolder, Hula mail and calendar server, and Mono. There's a few other things on Novell's Forge site, but they're not as "sexy" or even as useful as those other projects.

I hope this doesn't harm the Mono project, which Novell has been a vital part of. I have great hope for this project. But I'm not sure how it helps Novell's bottom line, so it might be the kind of thing that goes on the chopping block.

that's what Mono is for

see mono, it's .NET for Linux. There is always java too.

Well, imagine creating an application with nice 3D animation like that is a NO BRAINER. That's what Avalon + the new developer tools + .NET on Windows Vista will let you do, easier than a fart. Linux fan boys, enjoy your GCC.

Avalon? Avalon is supposed to be an XML descriptive language for GUI widgets, something like XUL or gladeXML. The only difference is that these tools exist right now while avalon is vaporware. So I'll go write a GUI in XML and finish it in a few minutes, while you still wait for avalon.

New developer tools? You really believe there are no developer tools on linux? Countless IDEs to choose from. From Anjuta to Kdevelop to Eclipse. Countless simple editors. Countless other tools like profilers, version control, etc etc. Detailed and thorough documentation on every tool you'll ever use. Please keep you uninformed opinions to yourself next time. Saves you the embarrassment.

.NET? .NET is BS. Read this very good article about .NET. It'll explain alot.
Now, If you're talking about managed programming languages like C# etc. there's mono. Pretty much everything .net has been transferred or will be soon, so your windows code will work on mono. Plus, mono has other extra subprojects you can use, not available on windows,

So yeah, you wait for your new tools MS fanboy, while we already have them.

Novell supplies it for those platforms already. Given that, why would you want to deal with Microsoft?

...and Linux, Windows, OSX, BSD, and Solaris

Welcome to the world of hackers making life better

http://www.mono-project.com/Main_Page

As others have commented, they only run on one platform, someone also said it's easy to embark native code in .Net, this might make a huge difference.

Others are wrong. .NET apps can be run on other operating systems, including Linux and OS X, with Mono and similar projects. Mono doesn't fully support all the .NET Framework classes yet, but if you use Gtk# instead of Windows Forms, it's easy to write cross-platform .NET apps.

Embedding native code in a .NET app is possible if you use Managed C++, but it comes with some performance overhead of its own. I doubt many apps actually use native code - no one likes writing in MC++ with all its ugly underscore keywords when C# is just a few clicks away. ;)

Oh my, the worst disease they could catch...

Still, I'm still not sure which one they got... It couldn't be this one since it's also called the *kiss* disease... I mean no... I'm SURE msft geeks^M^M^M^M^Mengeneers can be lai.. err KISSED...

So, it seems that it's this other one they got...

How long before Microsoft(tm)(r) sue those friggin C#/CLI/Coding Monkeys for proliferating (does this word even exist ?) those stupid ideas/disease of *free software* (laughable idea, isn't it ? I mean... FREE !!! bouah ha ha) ?

Thank YOU Ximian/Novell Monkeys...

Oh my... it was... the other disease... the one of /.ers... SARCASM !!!