Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #9811

Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils?

Date	2011-11-09 20:30 -0500
From	Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject	Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils?
References	(4 earlier) <j8rlqc$19m$1@news.albasani.net> <4eb1bef4$0$286$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <j8te92$3ms$1@news.albasani.net> <4eb33753$0$290$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <j9e29t$uuh$1@news.albasani.net>
Message-ID	<4ebb292c$0$287$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> (permalink)
Organization	SunSITE.dk - Supporting Open source

Show all headers | View raw

On 11/9/2011 9:21 AM, BGB wrote:
> On 11/3/2011 5:52 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> On 11/3/2011 3:01 AM, BGB wrote:
>>> On 11/2/2011 3:06 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>>> On 11/2/2011 10:58 AM, BGB wrote:
>>>>> Mono also can't run C++/CLI code last I checked, which sort of screws
>>>>> over my personal motivation to use it.
>>>>
>>>> It should be able to run pure code. Obviously not mixed code.
>>>
>>> yes, but banning mixed code sort of breaks C++/CLI's ability to...
>>> actually work...
>>>
>>> even if one compiles the code itself as pure CIL, then Mono rejects it
>>> due to things like "can't load MSVCR80.DLL" or similar.
>>
>> With:
>>
>> /clr:pure
>>
>> it should not.
>>
>> Are you sure that it does not work?
>>
>
> I tested it.
> the issue is, as soon as one uses and C or C++ runtime stuff, or calls
> into C land, well, Mono is no longer happy.

If one mixes in native code (not pure CIL) then then it is not portable.

If one uses DllImport in C++/CLI or C# or VB.NET to load
native modules then it is obviously not portable either.

So if portability is a requirement then one should not do
these things.

I believe Mono has a little tool to examine code for
portability.

Arne

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-01 22:18 -0400
  Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-01 22:35 -0700
    Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Cindy <c.thurston@frell.okb.uwa.edu> - 2011-11-02 03:17 -0400
      Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-02 07:58 -0700
        Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-02 18:06 -0400
          Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-03 00:01 -0700
            Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-03 20:48 -0400
            Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-03 20:52 -0400
              Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-09 07:21 -0700
                Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-09 20:30 -0500
                Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-09 22:48 -0700
      Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? coder <j-code@speak.invalid> - 2011-11-02 17:36 -0400
        Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-11-02 17:13 -0700
        Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Cindy <c.thurston@frell.okb.uwa.edu> - 2011-11-03 00:49 -0400
          Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-03 00:10 -0700
            Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Cindy <c.thurston@frell.okb.uwa.edu> - 2011-11-03 04:41 -0400
              Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-03 05:36 -0700
        Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? thoolen <tholen01@gmail.com> - 2011-11-02 23:13 -0700
    Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? markspace <-@.> - 2011-11-02 08:28 -0700
      Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-02 10:04 -0700
        Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? markspace <-@.> - 2011-11-02 10:19 -0700
          Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-02 14:32 -0700
            Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-11-02 17:20 -0700
              Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-02 21:34 -0700
                Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-03 20:57 -0400
                Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-09 09:25 -0700
                Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-09 20:25 -0500
                Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-09 23:05 -0700
    Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-02 17:26 -0400
      Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-02 15:01 -0700
        Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-02 18:18 -0400
          Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-02 18:20 -0400
          Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-02 22:30 -0700
            Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-03 21:30 -0400
            Re: back to .Net? lesser of two evils? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-11-03 21:40 -0400

csiph-web