OT: Re: Black Plague + Eu concerns
D. Newhall wrote:
>
> Vincent wrote:
> >
> >
> > Correct, Microsoft still supports their MFC (Microsoft Foundation Class)
> > library with
> > their Visual C++ compiler. Visual C++ is now a hybrid Native and MSIL
> > compiler. Its
> > 2005 version will support the current ISO C++ and CLR .NET v2.0
> > specification.
>
> So far Microsoft's support for language standards has been utter crap. They've
> never
> implemented a fully standard version of C or C+.
>
Yea, Microsoft went a little beyond the standard. Sort of like the GNU Compiler
collection.
ISO Conformance
***************
Will Visual C++ implement the 'export' feature?
-----------------------------------------------
In general, Microsoft is committed to implementing the complete ISO C++
standard. However, Microsoft is particularly committed to delivering features
that customers need. As of yet, the demand for the export feature in Standard
C++ has been minimal. The complexity of the export feature is significant and
customer feedback has shown that resources applied elsewhere now would solve more
practical issues. Over time, we will continue to listen to customer requests and
reevaluate whether implementing export is the best use of our resources.
>
> > Win32 and COM development will still be 100% supported, even emulated DOS
> > will be available.
> > However, if you wanted to make use of WinFX with Euphoria, one of three
> > things must
> > happen first:
> >
> > 1) Euphoria for Windows to become a object-oriented .NET enabled language,
> > with a seperate
> > byte code compiler to produce MSIL, it would have to be completely compliant
> > with the
> > latest CLR specification.
> >
> > 2) A .NET bridge for Euphoria, that would wrap the .NET runtime into C++
> > compiled DLLs,
> > then an additional Euphoria wrappers for those DLLs.
> >
> > 3) An Euphoria to MSIL translator, that would effectively convert normal
> > Euphoria code
> > to Microsoft IL, to be executed by their JIT compiler.
> >
> > The first option is the recommended, but any of these would be very complex
> > & difficult/daunting
> > task, especially since Euphoria is not even an object-oriented language,
> > were as .NET is
> > an advanced fully object-oriented platform like Java. All these options
> > would require the
> > .NET framework redistributable runtime too.
>
> What's more likely I think is that there'll be a separate product that'll
> compile it
> for you or something assuming Rob even decides to port it to .NET at all.
> Also, the
> ideal would be the third choice and not the first. Euphoria isn't object
> oriented now
> so I doubt it'd be overhauled just for a single new platform.
>
We'll see how it all plays out. Bottom line though is Robert will have to learn
much about this technology before he can begin doing anything. That is if he
becomes interested. This is not the case at this point? and doesn't matter to me
anyway.
>
> > > Judging by all previous Microsoft Windows upgrades,
> > > I think you can assume:
> > >
> > > - it will be delivered late
> > >
> >
> > Winter 2006, maybe delayed a couple of months further. Beta 1 is out now.
> > That will be 5 years after the release of Windows XP in 2001. Normally a new
> > Microsoft
> > OS comes out every 2 to 3 years. WinFS (next generation Windows file
> > system), MSH (Microsoft
> > Command Shell), along with any major fixes and improvements will all be
> > available in
> > a future service pack for Windows Vista.
>
> Maybe, the other just as likely possibility is that WinFS will be in the next
> version
> of Windows. The new shell will be in Vista eventually but MS initially said
> WinFS would
> be in the next Windows.
>
I'm pretty sure, Microsoft claims of releasing a beta version of WinFS during
the time of the official release. By 2007, there is suppost to be a service pack
or somthing with it finally available, along with a full implementation of the
new shell.
>
> > > - it will prove to be more "hype" than substance
> > >
> > > - it will be a smaller improvement than people were led
> > > to believe
> > >
> >
> > Windows Vista is promised to be a change as big as Windows 95 was to 3.1,
> > perhaps even
> > bigger. Beta 1 already proves that for the most part, even though many key
> > features
> > are missing, and is full of bugs. Microsoft wants a OS that is comparable
> > but different
> > than Apple's MacOS X Tiger, which I believe is currently the ultimate
> > operating system.
>
> Again we're going on what Microsoft is saying. There's a pretty good chance
> that it
> might just be a GUI update with some new apps.
The visual difference (Aero) is all you can see at this point unless you are an
MSDN subscriber (lots of money). If you read more about Vista or any of my
previous posts you would know that there is a whole lot more to it.
>
>
> > > - there will be fear that existing code won't work,
> > > but those fears will prove to be unfounded. After
> > > a quarter century, most DOS programs run fine on XP.
> > > I think the WIN32 API will be safe for at least that long.
> > >
> >
> > I think Microsoft assumes that by 2008, virtually all new development on
> > Windows Vista will
> be with WinFX. Plus much more development with the</font></i>
> > .NET framework on Windows 2000 and XP. WinFX will be the new native platform
> > for developing
> rich client + server side applications and web services,</font></i>
> > and the only way to go if you wish to take advantage of Vista and beyond.
> > People will have a
> choice of many languages to choose from, just look</font></i>
> > at these .NET enabled languages: <a
> > href="http://www.dotnetpowered.com/languages.aspx,">http://www.dotnetpowered.com/languages.aspx,</a>
> and many</font></i>
> > more are to come; Euphoria can be one of them! WinFX will also be available
> > for download to
> Windows 2000, Windows Server 2003, and Windows XP</font></i>
> > users to widen the availability to a much larger user base.
>
> What MS assumes and what's the truth are not always the same. For all we know
> they
> might cancel .NET by the time 2008 rolls around. Also, if my old apps didn't
> work in
> XP I would have stayed with 98 plus almost all new programs still support
> 98/ME.
>
WinFX (based off .NET) is suppost to be the development platform for the next
decade. Just like Win32 and COM has been. Microsoft isn't stupid enough to
suddenly drop support for existing technologies for reasons that are obvious.
>
> > > Also, you shouldn't assume that Microsoft is going to
> > > have a stranglehold on the industry forever. Look what happened
> > > when IBM, which dominated the PC world in the mid-80's, tried to
> > > get everyone to upgrade to PS/2 and OS/2. The industry and the public
> > > decided to keep the existing standards, and IBM was left out in the cold.
> > >
> >
> > Computers as you know them today wont last forever, probably not even 4
> > decades into
> > this century.
>
> What makes you say this? We've had UNIX for 30+ years and IBM still sells
> mainframes
> that are compatible with stuff from the '60s.
>
Moore's Law makes me say this. Even though Moore's law is more or less followed
these days, the chip miniaturization and frequency increasing will come to a
screeching stop. That is when DNA and/or Quantum computing comes in play. Thus a
whole new evolution in computing devices.
>
> > Microsoft will continue to have hold on the desktop market, while Linux has
> > hold on
> > the server side. However with the introduction of Windows Longhorn Server,
> > it is likely
> > to see more businesses returning back to Windows. Several are already doing
> > this, such
> > as Regal Entertainment Group in Los Vegas. Using a 10-year Net Present
> > Model, they
> > relized that Windows Server System would significantly lower thier Total
> > Cost of Ownership
> > (TCO) than using Red Hat Linux.
>
> Where'd you hear this? Also, the most secure server's are believed to be Mac
> OS X and FreeBSD with Red Hat Enterprise topping the Linux distros according
> to a security audit by the British government. If you look at the list of
> servers with the highest uptime (<a
> href="http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/today/top.avg.html">http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/today/top.avg.html</a>)
> there are only 4 Windows 2000 servers in the top 50 the rest are all BSD/OS or
> FreeBSD (except one IRIX and one Linux).
>
Companies that choose to go back to Windows at this point do so because they
found it a more cost effective solution. Windows Server 2003 is more secure and
stable than 2000. Now against the free Linux OSes, this doesnt really come into
play.
>
> > Realize that .NET will eventually find a place in the UNIX world too: Linux,
> > BSD, MacOS
> > X. Mono is an open-source, cross-plaform implementation of the CLR that is
> > not affiliated
> > with Microsoft. Currently only C# is supported, but an Visual Basic.NET
> > compiler is
> > being developed and in alpha stage at the moment. Microsoft is working on
> > the v2.0
> > specification of their shared-source ECMA Common Language Infrastructure
> > (CLI) and
> > the ECMA C# language specification code named: Rotor, that is the core of
> > the .NET
> > framework, which is to build on Windows XP, FreeBSD, and MacOS X. I believe
> > Mono and
> > dotGNU was made possible in part by Rotor.
>
> No, if you read the license you can't use Rotor code anywhere and for anything
> to the
> extent that writing bug fixes is disallowed.
>
The license basicly states that you may not use it for any commerical purposes,
or claim any of the existing code yours. But Mono is not commerical, it is
open-source and free. Mono and dotGNU developers most likely took the valuable
information about the CLI, available in the source, to create a foundation for
these projects. I bet very little code from it was used, but rather done from
stratch. It's been under speculation on whether or not Microsoft would terminate
these projects by lawsuits, but after 5 years, it seems Microsoft doesnt mind, or
maybe even supports efforts to implement their platform to other OSes. I think
that is what Microsoft is hinting with Rotor.
>
>
> The Euphoria Standard Library project :
> <a href="http://esl.sourceforge.net/">http://esl.sourceforge.net/</a>
> The Euphoria Standard Library mailing list :
> <a
> href="https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/esl-discussion">https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/esl-discussion</a>
>
Regards,
Vincent
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
