Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Mono's WinForms 2.0 Implementation Completed

Posted by kdawson on from the do-not-confuse-with-wind-farms dept.

adrian.henke writes "After four years of development, 115K lines of source code, and 6,434 commits, Jonathan Pobst announces that Mono's WinForms 2.0 implementation is now complete. This announcement has been long awaited by any .NET WinForms developer who has ever tried to get an applications to work on Linux using Mono."

8 of 164 comments (clear)

  1. But can I actually use it for anything? by beoba · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ..and still nothing on whether WinForms is legally safe to use.

    --
    I am not a number - I am a free man!
  2. Re:too little, too late? by Metasquares · · Score: 1, Insightful

    What platforms? .NET is very clunky, but it still seems very popular.

  3. Re:too little, too late? by DigitlDud · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm also very interested to hear what these platforms are.

  4. Re:This will be a big help by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Where did he say that cross-platform support was required? There's a big difference between something that's required and something that's nice.

  5. Re:too little, too late? by setagllib · · Score: 3, Insightful

    IronPython already works fine on Mono, but it doesn't have IDE support. PyDev in Eclipse is pretty nice for pure Python and Jython.

    Personally I'd rather work directly in Python/Ruby on GTK/Qt than go through an extra layer that is .NET. Maybe Anjuta could stop sucking and support Python, or Eclipse could have Glade integration.

    And while Mono's not horrible, but it's not nearly as fast as the Sun JVM, so if I want fast bytecode I'd rather use Java than C#.

    --
    Sam ty sig.
  6. Re:But why the Win32 style in WinForms? by Haeleth · · Score: 3, Insightful

    unfortunately Mono WinForms copied that in order to be compatible with .NET.
    Um, yes, Windows compatibility was kind of the entire point of supporting Winforms, you know?

    If you don't want to be compatible with Win32, use GTK#.
  7. Re:too little, too late? by Simon+Brooke · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Java is fast? Go try to run Azureus and weep.

    Oh, you do? And you think it is fast? Try utorrent on Windows or Transmission on OSX or KTorrent on Linux some time.

    People can write slow programs in any language. The question is, can moderately competent programmers write fast, efficient, maintainable programs in them? Pointing to one example is pointless. Back on topic, a quick check on Alioth will show you that overall, Java is faster than C#/Mono but uses more memory (although on some benchmarks the opposite is the case). It's also worth pointing out that although Java is not faster than C++ on any benchmark, it's substantially slower on only three. In general the performance of a program has much more to do with good design and good algorithms than it has to do with choice of language.

    --
    I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.
  8. Re:Would be awesome... by setagllib · · Score: 2, Insightful

    When you already have a dynamic language, type inference, anonymous types and extension methods are implicit. I'm not arguing every language should be dynamic, but the additions to C# are just solving problems specific to static languages. That's fine - static languages are still much faster than dynamic ones. Just saying, as far as languages go, C# is the one playing catchup, and with about a 20 year gap for many features.

    --
    Sam ty sig.