Portable .NET Reaches A Quarter Million Lines
Pnet Guy writes: "Portable .NET is a component of the dotGNU meta project to provide a CLI (ECMA standard) platform for free software. The project true to its name runs on a variety of platform including Linux,Hurd and Cygwin GNU systems. To avoid any legal problems Pnet has decided to go the hard way and bootstrap our compiler off gcc. Unlike Mono which uses microsoft's runtime to run their compiler. Our premier developer Rhys Weatherly has contributed 254,423 lines written since Jan 1, 2001. Which amounts to about 5000 lines per week which is phenomenal for any programmer. He is dotGNU's one-man army. So join him in celebrating his quarter billion lines of his code." Update: 12/27 02:41 GMT by T : Note that as many readers have pointed out, that's just like the headline says -- a quarter million lines, rather than billion.
Some related links to check out include the
dotGNU home page,
the Southern Storm Software (Rhys Weatherley's shop, with Portable .NET information),
Mono's page and Pnet's CVS repository.
I once wrote a 'small' 150k line util. Before I left the company, I was asked to comment it, after decent amounts (ie, more than '// perform the calculation') of comments, the line count was around 230k.
So how many of the quarter million are comments then ?
I didn't read the article, so maybe there are more specifics. But um, so what? Are these quality lines of code? Comments? Have they been peer reviewed? Regression tested (you did write test cases before hand, right)? I mean almost any programmer can crank out 5000 lines of crap a week, big deal. If he's producing quality, reasonably bug free code, in this amount, good for him. Otherwise, I'm not so sure I'd be touting this is a big achievement. With one person writing the code, you're only getting one persons views, etc. They're aren't any sanity checks during design decisions or even better, another way of looking at the problem. That's a bad thing in my opinion.
there are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots
This is no way a defence for MS, and even if it was, i do not think that that would make me an evil developer. .NET framework ? When compared to Win32 API it'a very big step forward for the developers who make money from Windows programming. I'd really like to hear comments of some programmers who has worked with J2EE and Java. Implementing something like MS passport may be a security problem, and i agree about it.But why most of the guys like to flame about what MS is doing with .NET technology, and totally ignore the technical framework these ideas are built on ? .NET framework, and C# are clearly superior to former MS software, and apart from being created by a monopoly they seem pretty good to me. If someone with o strong technical background and experience, would comment on why C# and/or .NET framework is evil, i'd read it with, and learn from it. Having C# and .NET Framework on Linux would be fine. Please try to explain why you don't need a good programming language and a proggramming api on linux ? or why it is bad. Do you think that MS is after money and Sun and Oracle are after something else ?
Ok, so did you take a look at the
Does anybody know how the two projects compare/cooperate? Both projects seem fairly active and doing very good work. I had assumed that Mono would be that part of DotGNU that provided the C# Compiler, Runtime and standard Libraries. But it seems that DotGNU also makes these parts with their portable net (PNet) together with their "Hailsorm" replacement.
.NET brings us.
The Mono project seems to be only interested in the C# language/compiler and runtime environment.
It is also interesting that the DotGNU project seems to have put a little more thought into the licensing issue. And in particular what it means to be a derived work (check their FAQ) in the new dynamic code environment that
Even though they are a GNU project they do not not use the ordinary GPL or the LGPL for their work but a GPL plus exception as also is used with GCC. This makes it possible to create derived works (in embedded devices for example where everything is linked together because you don't have a shared library loader) that with "normal" LGPL would be considered derived works.
Which is strange if you think about it. Ximian which sponsors Mono makes use of a more agressive copyleft then the 'regular' GNU project. Which means that if Mono "wins" then we will have more (forced/copylefted) free software then when the GNU project "wins". Never thought that a commercial company would be more agressive about copyleft then the GNU project.
Does anybody have more information about the why/how of the two (competing?) projects?
The DotGNU website and the Mono website don't seem to talk about the other project even though it is obvious that they are doing the same sort of thing.
Ooooh, let's give those lamer moderators a big ol' present this Boxing Day: I got points to burn, guys.
Microsoft once again leads the way for Linux. Amazing, isn't it, how many Linux projects are simply clones of existing Microsoft software.
Need a word processor? Get a Word clone. Need a flowchart tool? Get a Visio clone. Need a vector illustrator? Get an Illustrator clone. Can't find a clone? Run WINE and use the original!
For a community that loathes Microsoft, there certainly seems to be a lot of effort to re-create Windows and Windows apps.
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
Which is still a fuckload of code. I used sloccount, which is not perfect, but is a pretty informative tool none the less.
/tmp/pnet/pnet-0.2.6
./sloccount
Totals grouped by language (dominant language first)
ansic: 121564 (81.39%)
sh: 17160 (11.49%)
yacc: 5634 (3.77%)
lex: 2091 (1.40%)
asm: 1937 (1.30%)
cpp: 961 (0.64%)
exp: 20 (0.01%)
Total Physical Source Lines of Code (SLOC) = 149,367
Development Effort Estimate, Person-Years = 38.37
Schedule Estimate, Years = 2.14
Estimated Average Number of Developers = 17.92
Total Estimated Cost to Develop = $ 5,183,332
It appears that the damn lameness filter is preventing me from posting this, so i have trimmed the output a bit.
Mono is more full-featured than DotGNU in a number of important ways:
.NET system until it is able to be self-hosted
- Mono has a nearly fully functional VM with Jit.
- DotGNU has no VM at all
- Mono nearly has a c# compiler written in c#.
- DotGNU intends to use gcc and a C compiled C# compiler.
- Mono has more than 60% of the class libraries written
- DotGNU has only a fraction of classes written.
- Mono is much better coordinated and has better public relations thanks to Miguel
- Mono has regression analysis scripts
- As far as I can tell Mono has better i18n support
Problems with Mono:
- no garbage collection
- initially hosted via Microsoft's
Mono unknowns:
- will it depend on Gtk/GNOME?
my questions are:
does it work?
is it buggy?
how reliable is it?
in my opinion well commented code is just as important as the code itself.
what good is code that noone knows anything about except the author?
//comments are a good thing
/* lets not criticize them */
It's ANSI C.
If it's this long, then it's not a suitable implementation
language.
He should have used a more capable language (read C++)
and avoid rewriting and copy/pasting the whole world
including data structures.
To understand how big code is written: www.kde.org
--exa--