Hello,

I am reposting the mail, as it was blocked by the lists platform:

---------- Message transféré ----------
From: Victoria French <victoria.fre...@metrosharp.co>
To: devel@lists.monobjc.net
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2011 13:11:05 -0500
Subject: Re: [devel@lists.monobjc.net] iPhone / iPad ?
I can't speak for Novel here, but I can tell you that first there would need
to be a very special version of mono made itself. I would have to not only
be compiled to run on Apple A chips but the concept itself needs changing.

Mono would no longer be able to run without being pre-jitted at compile time
to native code (Apples rule on interprereted languages). Then the entire
framework would need to be a static library (.o) instead of a dynamic one
(ex .dylib, .dll) again Apples rule on linking to dynamic libraries.

After all the necessary changes to Mono was completed then Monobj could be
ported but again lies the dynamic linking rule.

I can see why Novell is charging for MonoTouch, the amount of work to make
this a reality is insane. Think if your app had to load the entire mono
library in memory! You would immediately end up with the phone rebooting.
You only get 128M of ram, no paging file and your entire application gets
loaded into that memory space before you can even execute a line of code.

$400 is cheaper than trying to get someone else to do this or even doing it
yourself IMO.

V


2011/7/18 Erik Touve <eto...@sbcglobal.net>

> I was wondering if it's possible to wrap the iOS SDK framework in monoobjc.
>
> Unity does an excellent job of mono on iOS.
>
> I fully support Ximian / Novell / now Xamarin efforts.  I love the .NET
> implementation.  But, I'm not willing for fork over $400 for in-house
> application development - something I'm not ever going to sell through any
> store.
>
> In theory I suppose monobjc could do the same thing as MonoTouch.  I'm
> certain there's a lot of work connecting all the dots... for example
> specialized mono compilation.
>
> Are there plans to do this eventually?  Can I do this myself?  Are there
> crazy licensing issues?
>
> -E
>
>

Reply via email to