Hi,
Mono VM is under LGPL that does not allow for partial "Borrow"
of code but only linking the entire library if I understand the license
correctly. But I cant find any reason for them tho not to allow us to use some
of it as this would be just like porting mono to a new platform. But I can't
wait to see the code you are working on J
Kveðja/Regards
Ásgeir Halldórsson
E.C. Software
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bruce Markham
Sent: 22. nóvember 2007 03:41
To: SharpOS Developers
Subject: [SharpOS Developers] runtime types: naming and implementation
Okay, the more I look at Mono runtime stuff, the more tempted I am to use some
of their type names when coding SharpOS runtime stuff. Because, I'm afraid,
whether we like it or not, I think some of our basic runtime support types will
work the exact same way as Mono.
For example, MonoObject, represents the prefix before a managed object's main
data, that points to the sync-block data and the vtable for that object
instance. Originally, I was calling ours ManagedObjectHeader - and regardless
as to what I coded, what Mono coded, and what Microsoft says about Microsoft's
way of doing it. No biggie, right? Simple enough concept?
Well, what about representing arrays? And some basic type descriptors? I almost
feel like I am cheating, because I've looked at Mono so much. But I don't know
how licensing issues stand. I know that we can easily make our stuff work the
same, but if I Alt+Tab back and forth to make sure the mimickry is accurate,
than aren't I just porting some of Mono's code? If so, then we have to address
Mono <--> SharpOS licensing issues.
Some of our runtime-support types *have* to be identical to Mono, at least in
structure, because of how they are marshaled into the Mono corlib at runtime.
For example:
>From Mono's corlib's System.String :
private int length;
private char start_char;
...those are the only two fields.
And surprise surprise, those are the same two fields, with the same size, type,
and position, as the ones from MonoString, in Mono's runtime code:
gint32 length;
gunichar2 chars [MONO_ZERO_LEN_ARRAY];
So, more or less, we need to write our runtime string type the same, don't we?
(Unless we want invent some round-about way to marshal types between the EDC
and EIC.)
Granted, ours would look more like:
public struct MonoString
{
int length;
char* firstChar;
}
But I want to know what you guys have to say before I sweet-talk Dennis into
pestering the Mono-dev list...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
SharpOS-Developers mailing list
SharpOS-Developers@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sharpos-developers
