No the CLR is not pointless; but I think maybe there is a misunderstanding about what it was intended to do. Common-language only means languages which conform to Microsoft's Common Language Specification. Just because some tool generates valid IL does not mean that the generated code is CLS-compliant. In the environment in which I work, the CLR's strategic importance is that it provides a Microsoft alternative to the JVM. There is now no longer any excuse (from the "IT god's" perspective) for me to have Sun's JVM installed, or design products that depend upon it.
-- Neal -----Original Message----- From: Smiley, David W. (DSMILEY) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 3:52 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Why translated to C#? Doesn't the CLR avoid the need for ports? Importance: Low A disappointing conclusion one could draw from all the reactions to my question is that the usefulness of a common-language-runtime is flawed and pointless. Personally, I'm not willing to accept that. Do you guys believe that or is Lucene atypical or...? ~ David
