1. [OT] About .Net
- Posted by c.k.lester <euphoric at ckl?ster?com>
May 20, 2008
-
Last edited May 21, 2008
Why is the .Net download > 60MB? What exactly is .Net?
2. Re: [OT] About .Net
- Posted by Jeremy Cowgar <jeremy at cowgar.??m>
May 20, 2008
-
Last edited May 21, 2008
c.k.lester wrote:
>
> Why is the .Net download > 60MB? What exactly is .Net?
Is 60mb for the runtime or the SDK as well? .net is a common language runtime.
You know how you write a java program, compile it into .class files and then
execute it on any platform with the JRE (java runtime environment) ?
.net is the same thing, but for Microsoft. Obviously there are differences
internally, I do not mean .net is Java or that one is better than the other. I
was making a high level comparison.
--
Jeremy Cowgar
http://jeremy.cowgar.com
3. Re: [OT] About .Net
- Posted by c.k.lester <euphoric at ck?ester.co?>
May 20, 2008
-
Last edited May 21, 2008
Jeremy Cowgar wrote:
> c.k.lester wrote:
> > Why is the .Net download > 60MB? What exactly is .Net?
> Is 60mb for the runtime or the SDK as well?
I was only wanting the runtime, so I'm guessing just the runtime.
> .net is a common language runtime.
I thought .Net was a language, like Java is a language. Now that I think
about it, C# is the language... I think. :D
> You know how you write a java program, compile it into .class files and then
> execute it on any platform with the JRE (java runtime environment) ?
Okay; how is this better than having a cross-platform language, especially
when .Net is just for Windows (right?)? Java goes everywhere, from what I
hear. And Euphoria works in multiple platforms.
I don't get it.
4. Re: [OT] About .Net
- Posted by Jeremy Cowgar <jeremy at ?owgar.c?m>
May 20, 2008
-
Last edited May 21, 2008
c.k.lester wrote:
>
>
> I was only wanting the runtime, so I'm guessing just the runtime.
>
> > .net is a common language runtime.
>
> I thought .Net was a language, like Java is a language. Now that I think
> about it, C# is the language... I think. :D
>
.net is what MS calls a CLR, common language runtime. You know how Euphoria will
parse code and save IL internally that it then executes? Well, imagine you write
out the IL to a file. You can then send that file to 50 different people who have
Euphoria installed on Linux, FreeBSD, Windows, DOS, etc... They can then run
that.
Now, say John comes around and says, Euphoria executes it's IL very fast, wow,
that's great but I hate the language. He then writes his own language that
outputs the exact same IL. So, Euphoria's interpreter could then execute that IL.
Euphoria has no idea it didn't come from Euphoria source. It's the same IL, it
could care less.
Now, Jane comes along and says the same thing but doesn't like Euphoria or Johns
and she creates yet another.
That is the CLR concept and .net has many, many languages that compile to it's
"IL". Not just by Microsoft but other developers, open source authors, etc...
> > You know how you write a java program, compile it into .class files and then
> > execute it on any platform with the JRE (java runtime environment) ?
>
> Okay; how is this better than having a cross-platform language, especially
> when .Net is just for Windows (right?)? Java goes everywhere, from what I
> hear. And Euphoria works in multiple platforms.
>
> I don't get it.
There is the Mono project that is sponsored I think by Novel? It is used big
time in Gnome. It is a .net runtime for Linux/FreeBSD and I may be mistaken, but
is it ported to Mac OSX? Anyway, the compatability between Mono and Windows .NET
is getting better but there are many parts of .NET's Windows API that are closed
and will never be implemented in Mono, specifically, almost anything to do with
Windows. GUI, Windows DLLs and such.
Mono wraps GTK and allows you to write GTK apps on both Linux and Windows, but
anyone who has used GTK on Windows knows its a memory hog and although it's
getting much, much better, it still has it's issues on Windows.
So... how is it better? Um, I use Euphoria! That's how much better I think it is
--
Jeremy Cowgar
http://jeremy.cowgar.com
5. Re: [OT] About .Net
- Posted by Matt Lewis <matthewwalkerlewis at gma?l.c?m>
May 20, 2008
-
Last edited May 21, 2008
c.k.lester wrote:
>
> Jeremy Cowgar wrote:
> > c.k.lester wrote:
> > > Why is the .Net download > 60MB? What exactly is .Net?
> > Is 60mb for the runtime or the SDK as well?
>
> I was only wanting the runtime, so I'm guessing just the runtime.
>
> > .net is a common language runtime.
>
> I thought .Net was a language, like Java is a language. Now that I think
> about it, C# is the language... I think. :D
There are many languages. They get compiled to IL code. There's even a
.NET version of ooeu.
> > You know how you write a java program, compile it into .class files and then
> > execute it on any platform with the JRE (java runtime environment) ?
>
> Okay; how is this better than having a cross-platform language, especially
> when .Net is just for Windows (right?)? Java goes everywhere, from what I
> hear. And Euphoria works in multiple platforms.
There are gotchas with java. There's also Mono, which is basically a
cross platform .NET implementation. It may be better if you're working with
a 100% MS stack. But if you want cross platform, I'd say that Java is
better.
Matt
6. Re: [OT] About .Net
- Posted by Bernie Ryan <xotron at blu?frog.?om>
May 20, 2008
-
Last edited May 21, 2008
.Net sounds like a re-run of Microsoft's old Microsoft P-Code Technology
reborn.
Bernie
My files in archive:
WMOTOR, XMOTOR, W32ENGIN, MIXEDLIB, EU_ENGIN, WIN32ERU, WIN32API
Can be downloaded here:
http://www.rapideuphoria.com/cgi-bin/asearch.exu?dos=on&win=on&lnx=on&gen=on&keywords=bernie+ryan
