Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Open Sources CoreCLR, the .NET Execution Engine
An anonymous reader writes: As part of Microsoft's continuing project to open source the .NET framework, the company has announced that CoreCLR, the execution engine for .NET Core, is now available on GitHub. CoreCLR handles things like garbage collection, compilation to machine code, and IL byte code loading. The .NET team said, "We have released the complete and up-to-date CoreCLR implementation, which includes RyuJIT, the .NET GC, native interop and many other .NET runtime components. ... We will be adding Linux and Mac implementations of platform-specific components over the next few months. We already have some Linux-specific code in .NET Core, but we're really just getting started on our ports. We wanted to open up the code first, so that we could all enjoy the cross-platform journey from the outset."
Aren't we bored with this, "Let's pretend to be more open than the next guy when actually we just want to create more lock-in" dance?
It's like the way everyone non-MS touted moving to WEB APPS when what they really meant was, "Let's weaken the PC platform while having proprietary apps for all our mobile devices."
Because, you know, open sourcing by the devil has to be evil! :-)
In all seriousness though, does this make .NET more open than Java? In other words, RMS-acceptable?
My Stack Overflow user
....but I didn't know I live in hell. No flying pigs or raining frogs though, so maybe we're good.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
So, I will be able to run pure .NET applications on Linux desktop? Interesting
Religion: The greatest weapon of mass destruction of all time
... patents would I infringe on by just cloning their repo?
Do they get to take my first born if i actually read the code too?
I apologize for the lack of a signature.
Don't need Mono no mo bro.
... when I see a working fork in the wild. Like mysql mariadb. When I see that ppl or companies can do that, I will believe it is open source. Interesting times ahead :-)
They'll make a patent pledge to never go after FOSS software and offer a program wherein anyone who uses .NET for commercial purposes can sign a mutual non-litigation agreement over patents pertaining to the use of .NET and the patents covered by the software implemented in .NET.
I don't get Microsoft anymore. What are they hoping to accomplish by opening up .NET _and_ porting it to Mac and Linux? Have they given up on Windows?
Xamarian Mono or it's predecessor Ximian Mono. This is both a good and bad thing because while they're releasing the code, why aren't they working with Xamarian since they've already got a cross platform .NET environment? Or is this the old Microsoft with the Embrace, Extend, Eradicate mentality we're seeing here?
I've used Mono for a long time and while it doesn't have all the frameworks, it's great if you want to C# code and go cross platform. It's still .NET 4 compatible and things like WPF aren't in there so YMMV
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
Aren't guys like you tired of bitching about Microsoft... for fucks sake, they are in the process of releasing their entire toolchain (from the bottom up) under the MIT licence.
Parent is actually insightful. Naturally, I didn't RTFA, but the summary should have mentioned the license. I assumed this was yet another MS "open source" release under one of their shitty proprietary licenses (you know, the kind of "open source" that is so restrictive it practically comes with an NDA).
Using a Free license like MIT actually makes this more than an empty gesture. Yes, I actually confirmed the LICENSE.txt on the github project is MIT License.
Seriously, that guy has been shouting at the pigeons for years. And I speak as an open source user and advocate.
This *is* a suprise. I knew MS would learn the lesson eventually. Probably to late, but eventually. That they are this serious about it actually honestly suprises me.
It still is to late, IMHO. FOSS toolchains, especially those web-centric ones, are deeply entrenched with developers already. And those teams deliver software and solutions orders of magnitude cheaper than anything MS has to offer - even if they runtime tech is now all FOSS.
But, who knows? MS might just become the FOSS services company Linuxcare alway wanted to be. They've should've started 10 years ago. If they make a few more smart moves they'll be in the limelight again.
My 2 cents.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
I'd never thought I'd see the day Microsoft would make all that great stuff available for everyone. Where's the catch? I really need to know there's one to sate my suspicions. Otherwise my paranoia will take over and I'll end up in an asylum.
Not really effective, then.
What is this good for? If I won't be able to run existing .net applications in non-windows oses, or be able to develop new .net applications from non-windows oses, what do I care?
Just think if MS would have done this over a decade ago when they released C# / .NET. It could have nearly replaced Java. I could see 3rd party "standards" created for widgets that would be cross-platform (like Swing, etc, for Java), that people could use to create their cross-platform windowed GUI type apps. The formal Windows APIs would be used for people wanting to create full blown Windows-only apps. However all the core functionality (non-gui stuff) would be cross-platform and if written properly could have driven both the "Swing"-ish community created GUI, as well as the official Windows GUI stuff.
Better known as 318230.
> cannot be forked and is patent encumbered
It is under a MIT license and have an additional patent promise. So fork away. And please RTFA before posting FUD.
Funny how all the Microsoft boosters are too afraid to post with their actual account names attached.
Probably afraid that their posting histories would reveal them to be the paid shills they really are. "Billly Gates" and "phantomfive" for example.
Finally! strI wWas rReally uMissing szSome Hungarian pNotation!
Nice ad hominem. Not posting this anonymously, nor am I a Microsoft booster. Now will you go check your facts? It is indeed MIT licensed (as been cited a dozen times above), and does have a patent promise attached. What more do you want? Yes, there could be some clever devilry hidden about somewhere, but on its face it seems pretty legit and straightforward.
Maybe they can start by unblocking chrome linux in OWA, "we love linux" my ass.
sounds like there's a good joke in there somewhere, but I'm missing it.
can anyone set it up properly?
Funny how all the Microsoft boosters are too afraid to post with their actual account names attached.
Probably afraid that their posting histories would reveal them to be the paid shills they really are. "Billly Gates" and "phantomfive" for example.
Or maybe they are afraid that by just talking about Microsoft products in a positive manner, they would automatically be tagged as shills by shitheads like you.
Like they did back in November, you mean?
http://www.visualstudio.com/en-us/news/vs2013-community-vs.aspx
How's that Fortran thing working out for you? I hear it's the latest rage.
Now make the whole Visual Studio suite available for free to home users.
You might want to check out Visual Studio 2013 Community Edition... It's the same thing as VS2013 Professional; it's free until your "hobby" has 5 employees or $1 million in revenue
Despite the anit-MS sentiment, there is a grain of truth to the "ALWAYS a hidden trap" sentiment.
Who here doesn't believe that MS has a huge marketing department that essentially holds sway over almost all major announcements and strategies. The untrue part is that there is some sort of evil at work. There's not. It's not personal at all.
However, to the marketing department, all software outside their control is viewed as a potential competitor. And Linux/GNU more than most.
So we can be reasonably certain that any MS direction is not designed to help Linux be more attractive to users.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=I25UeVXrEHQ
I'm glad that you are following what is happening in Microsoft-land. ;)
It's all about C# developers. Longtime C# users can now write software for almost any platform, especially when Xamarin is in the mix.
Cloud based. No thanks.
Holy crap....
Hell has officially frozen over. That would have never happened under the iron Fist of Ballmer.
This just might make the RasPi Windows 10 release relevant.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
This is why I don't like developing for Microsoft's stack. They seem to want to throw everything out every few years and start over.
Not that different from the Java FOSS cornucopia. And in many ways, it is better than the design-by-committee-slow-as-molasses thing we have with JEE and the JCP.
Then again, it seems like the web business is like that, too.
A lot of it is ego and developers OCD/fixation with trying new technical things (as opposed to solving business problems with economical, yet maintainable solutions.)
OTH, a lot of the churn is due to external pressures of competition. You put something on the web, someone is already competing with you.
Then you have catch up at worst, or out-innovate them at best, which leads to technical changes and challenges that inevitable lead to revisiting and reinventing (sometimes brilliantly, many times horrendously) the plumbing, the scaffolding and struts that puts all of it together, where it gets deployed, etc.
Damn. Doesn't anyone write non-disposable code any more?
Non-disposable technical software is not a quality you want to seek unless you are developing critical systems.
If your web stuff is not disposable, it means it cannot be replaced when the need arises (which it will.)
Disposable code is trivial if we know what the fuck we are doing. What we do not want are Enterprise-level business logic and dependencies and fundamental architectural decisions that are trivially disposable.
You want those things to be clear and malleable, but not so easily disposable. Because then you have a clear blue print with which to create systems with disposable (ergo, loosely coupled) design/implementation-level artifacts.
Now make the whole Visual Studio suite available for free to home users.
They did... The 2013 Community Edition was released a couple months ago and includes all the languages and even supports the Visual Studio plugins. It's not Ultimate, but can do pretty much everything a home user would need. The older express versions have been free for years too but didn't support plugins.
In other news, Oracle has announced that they're working on a new version of Java.
Dubbed vNExT, it's supposed to provide a much faster VM than the classic JVM,
Unfortunately, to take advantage of it, you have to recompile your Java code with the new "Joslyn" compiler, which isn't quite done yet.
GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
Okay, it's MIT licensed, and there's a patent promise - which i personally don't trust, but you're welcome to.
I don't understand this fear that people have over this patent promise. Are there that many people out there who intend to write their own version of the .NET core components? The only group that may be affected by Microsoft changing their mind is the Mono project team. It wouldn't affect anyone who just wrote their own applications using the .NET framework.
This is basically like Oracle suing Google because they created their own Java runtime engine for their Android phones, Dalvik. Microsoft has promised to not to be as stupid as Oracle.
Because [the MIT license is] not "Stallman Approved."
The license of X11 is "Stallman approved" in the sense that it's a GPL-compatible free software license. But FSF's favorite non-copyleft license is the Apache license version 2.0, which has stronger patent guarantees in jurisdictions with software patents.
It's the cost of doing business in the US - you have to expect being sued.
I apologize for the lack of a signature.
Does this include ".NET Native", where they compile ahead-of-time using the same backend Visual Studio uses for C++?
It's relatively nice as far as VMs go, better designed than the JVM. This was a piece of good engineering work from Microsoft and I'm glad they're opening it. Welcome to the new world, MS guys. You don't seem to be acting quite so black and white anymore. Good on you.
And to the naysayers... well, it's a start. Be kind.
That is all.
And yet here you are posting in a thread about Microsoft. Top notch.
I don't know shit about Fortran. I do Android, iOS and (embedded) Linux.
I apologize for the lack of a signature.
it is still much better for my nuke simulations than your hipster stuff. because it can actually be optimized seriously. here is a pfennig, boy. call dr kuck and talk to a real man.
he automatically parallelized code while you still shat into your pampers.
RMS occupies a point of morality that makes far fewer compromises than most people are willing to do. He has a great deal of moral authority, and he's been pretty oracular in the past. No one else is willing to make the same choices, but it's not necessarily important.
What is important is that he keeps on moralizing. Because it makes positions nearer to that (with acceptable compromises) seem more normal. So far it's working great. The crazier he gets, the more sane the rest of us sound. Well, not that I think he's changed his message much in the last 30 years, but you take my point.
Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
No, it's just the idiot sysadmins who think their entire job function is to write shell scripts that don't like systemd. "But shell scripts are UNIX!" So is C, dumbass. In point of fact, it's most Unixy to write it in bash first, and then write a non-hacky version of it in C.
Don't like it? Go use OpenRC. Oh wait they're doing the exact same thing. The difference is that while they're abstracting out common functionality into C libraries, adding dependency information to the scripts, adding support for cgroups, and leaving behind a very small shell script that barely does anything, systemd is doing the exact same thing and leaving behind a very small unit file with a declarative syntax.
Those of you who think that the job of the OS is to be a minimal platform for executing user-defined scripts, can keep using Slackware, and reconcile your differences with OpenRC. Those of us who think that pidfiles are a brain-dead awful way to track services, and the people who don't give a shit about scripting can use something that actually works like it's supposed to.
Do you even know what ad hominem means? Did he say that his argument is invalid because of lippydude's skin color, gender or anything personal? There was no personal attack in that comment. (unless this site is stupid enough to let anonymous people edit their comments).
I'll probably be modded down for this, but I hardly consider RMS and morality in the same breath. I saw a video of his posted a few days ago by a /. poster, where he said that if you steal food when you are hungry and don't have money to eat, that's more justified than writing proprietary software. We've discussed this in past RMS related threads - where he endorses breaking the law if one doesn't like it, endorses 'consensual' pedophilia, thinks that necrophilia should be legal, and all the while, believing that proprietary software should be illegal and that software should not have owners
That was meant for unixisc.
Just because it's a morality that you disagree with does not mean he is amoral. He is an extremist — that's why he's useful. He makes any other Open Source advocate seem like a moderate, when in fact the software industry has changed radically in the last 15-20 years.
RMS may be a crackpot, but he's a very influential crackpot. The largest software vendor in the world just open-sourced their core programming platform. Do you remember how loony Open Source used to be? No one is laughing at the "freetards" any more. RMS may still be risible, but he may yet have the last laugh.
Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
Does this mean Microsoft has developed cancer?
Seriously, while recent moves in this regard have been good, only a fool would ignore history. Microsoft, for as long as it has existed, has done countless morally dubious things in order to maintain control. The history is all right there for the googling. Just because they do a couple Good(tm) things doesn't magically mean they have suddenly realized the errors of their ways and are doing a 180. You can't erase ~40 years of assholry.
Based on the moves Microsoft has done lately, I will move my needle from "completely distrust" to "MAYBE it's not a trap" but still nowhere near the realm of "trustworthy"
I wonder if this could be a help to the age old and now dormant moonlight project ? Is any of .NET 's code in silverlight ?