Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

KDE Adopting Mono

Posted by timothy on from the big-change dept.

leandrod writes "The Register reports that members of KDE are committing to use and support mono, Ximian's independent .Net implementation. Not only does this provide KDE with some of the multilingual programmability it initially forfeited by its use of Qt, it also spells well for cross-desktop application and even KDE-Gnome desktop integration, because mono is developed by Gnome's most prominent ISV, Ximian, and is intended for Gnome integration." Update: 09/12 14:22 GMT by T : Actually, the Register story overstates things a bit, it seems. According to KDE developer Hetz Ben Hamo (heunique), "Yes, you can use QT# to write QT/KDE apps, but it doesn't mean that KDE will support mono. you can use kernel 2.4, but you can use any linux kernel or any other unix based OS." See also this comment from David Faure for more insight.

6 of 257 comments (clear)

  1. hope mono gets it right... by TechnoVooDooDaddy · · Score: 5, Insightful
    otherwise KDE is going to suffer the same crippling crush of bloat that Windows is getting from .NET

    I wrote a small maintenence application, and compiled it targeting non-.NET Win32, the file was 19 meg.. ok, yeah, it's probably got the runtime in there... a similar java runtime is 7 or 8 meg.

    KDE is also going to suffer from a similar rash of programmers like windows VB programmers who thing that dragging and dropping an application together makes them every bit as valuable as someone who can lovingly craft inline assembler into their C routines for speed and keep an eye on memory utilization. The dot.bomb shakeup was good for scaring those VB types out of the industry for a bit, but MS is still trying to sway focus over to "productivity" over stability or longevity.

    Yeah i know i'm ranting, but i've got mana to burn.

    1. Re:hope mono gets it right... by Mr_Silver · · Score: 5, Insightful
      KDE is also going to suffer from a similar rash of programmers like windows VB programmers who thing that dragging and dropping an application together makes them every bit as valuable as someone who can lovingly craft inline assembler into their C routines for speed and keep an eye on memory utilization.

      If a VB programmer has "dragged and dropped" an application together that I need and I can afford, then I fail to see what makes them any less valuable than the C and inline assembler programmers who haven't done such a thing.

      There are plenty of good and useful VB applications out there, same as there are plenty of crap and bloated C and inline assembler applications out there.

      Rather than mainly scoring applications based on the language they were written in, you should give priority to the task they perform. Personally (as a user) I don't give a toss what language something is written in, if it works and does the job.

      --
      Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
    2. Re:hope mono gets it right... by XaXXon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      KDE is also going to suffer from a similar rash of programmers like windows VB programmers who thing that dragging and dropping an application together makes them every bit as valuable as someone who can lovingly craft inline assembler into their C routines for speed and keep an eye on memory utilization.

      Personally, I don't care how a program is written. And I know very few people are going to complain about having more apps for Linux. Many applications have absolutely no need to be written in highly optimized C. This can cause more errors, and more time spent trying to optimize for an extra 20% boost and leaves less time for adding new features. Personally, I'll take the one that takes 20% longer to run with 80% more features..

      The dot.bomb shakeup was good for scaring those VB types out of the industry for a bit, but MS is still trying to sway focus over to "productivity" over stability or longevity.

      If you had been paying attention, the "dot.bomb shakeup", as you call it, had very little to do with technology and far more to do with business models. It didn't matter what programming language you used to set up your online dog-food website, it wasn't going to make it. These companies were doomed from the start, and did not go out of business because they hired VB programmers instead of K&R C programmers.

  2. WRONG by dfaure · · Score: 5, Informative

    What a load of mis-information....

    The Qt-C# / KDE-C# developer might be proud of his language bindings (undoubtly it's cool that those exist), but that's no reason to spread such wrong rumours. (I'm not accusing him, it could very well be the journalist from TheRegister who's making most of this up).

    There is NO decision from the KDE project to do ANYTHING with C#, .NET or Mono at this point.

    It's amazing how much bullshit people can invent.

    David, KDE/KOffice developer.

    1. Re:WRONG by manyoso · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You are right. I tried to correct some of Gavin's statements such as: 'Qt is a language'

      LOL, but I was in the middle of dinner when he called and he didn't have time to wait...

      KDE is not 'switching' to Mono nor has KDE 'adopted' Mono, but some developers are attempting to include support for Mono in KDE. That's it. It is a another choice for the developer and IMHO a very _cool_ choice :-)

      Cheers,

      Adam

    2. Re:WRONG by manyoso · · Score: 5, Informative

      Well Gavin emailed Joseph and Andreas first. Then he emailed me and that's where he got the quotes. I pointed him to Miguel for questions about Mono. I think he mistated Miguel a few times too (read: Mono has 15,000 libraries) LOL

      Then he gave me a call last night and we talked. I explained a few things. Later that night he sent me the draft and called. He explained that he had 15 minutes for me to correct anything. I emailed him some suggestions later that night, but he apparently didn't get them in time.

      Oh well, the point of the article is that we are in the process of adding some cool bindings to KDE not just the Qt# ones, but also some DCOP as well as Joseph attempting to extend Kate to allow plugins written in Qt#.

      I stand by the quotes though. I think a Mono binding is good for KDE, because it allows multi-language support through one binding. To put another way, it adds C# _plus_ MonoBasic and all the other languages Mono and DotGNU support.

      It also holds the promise of more apps for KDE if some windows developers are intrigued. I think that's a winning combination :-)

      Adam