Yes, I think I need to revisit that high school lesson on reading comprehension 
... thanks for the clarification.

>>> Miguel de Icaza <> 12/01/16 8:42 AM >>>

That would still work Johnnie, it would just be a Mono implementation detail 
that matters to people porting Mono to new platforms or actively involved in 
working in the core of Mono.

On 11/30/16, 3:37 PM, "Mono-devel-list on behalf of Johnnie Odom" 
< on behalf of> 

    I write a lot of small sysadmin utilities using Mono and one of the big 
selling points with the .NET libraries I use is that they generally do work 
across Windows/Mac/Linux without recompilation. I think the future for 
Microsoft is to be as easily cross-platform as possible. I would strongly 
recommend going down the Mono path here.
    >>> James Bellinger via Mono-devel-list <> 
11/30/16 11:15 AM >>>
    Well, *they* could switch. My own platform specific libraries do 
    detection. Anything else just ends up with lots of vaguely shareable, 
    similar, but unshared code. In practice what it means is a developer is 
    going to forget to package anything but the Windows version. That may be 
    the idea. Making the library *just work*, without the developer having 
    to worry about platforms, is best.
    I have two libraries I maintain that support both .NET Framework and 
    .NET Micro Framework (and Arduino -- libraries for embedded devices), 
    and due to how Microsoft ended up putting things in different 
    assemblies, even the same classes, it's a cluttered #ifdef mess. Some 
    are missing this overload or that. I have to have separate solution 
    files. In the future I'll probably just ditch Micro Framework support. 
    It's terrible, a hassle to maintain, and even more of a hassle to 
    support, debug and test.
    It's probably better to pull Microsoft out of the mud as best as 
    possible instead of sinking with them.
    On 11/29/2016 10:56 PM, Miguel de Icaza wrote:
    > Hello Jerod,
    >     Question as a followup:
    >     "This means that some of the work that we will have to do will
    >     involve either adjusting the CoreFX code to work in the way that
    >     Mono works, or give up on our tradition of having the same
    >     assemblies work across all platforms"
    >     Is there a preference/leaning one way or another on that point
    >     yet, or is it still being investigated?
    > We will have to explore this when we get there.
    > My personal preference is to use the Mono model, but the maintainers 
    > of CoreFX likely have their own personal preference to keep their 
    > model and they own that code, so we might have to either get creative 
    > with the solution that glues CoreFX code in Mono, or adjust Mono.   
    > Neither is easy :-)
    > Miguel.
    > _______________________________________________
    > Mono-devel-list mailing list
    Mono-devel-list mailing list

Mono-devel-list mailing list

Reply via email to