5 ms·

I lead a dev team in the real world, using mono for all our work, and I don't need them to do any such thing. Your definition of the "ONLY" goal for them is utt

by h1bored 17y ago

I lead a dev team in the real world, using mono for all our work, and I don't need them to do any such thing. Your definition of the "ONLY" goal for them is utter claptrap and certainly not a definition of what the "real world needs". Stop confusing your desires ("Simply make my C# code work there, and I'll be happy") with the only sane direction for them to go. I certainly wouldn't thank them for slavishly copying .net 1.1 or any such thing. If you want that so badly, feel free to submit patches, I'm sure they'll gladly accept.

rbanffy 17y ago
I am quite sure that complete compatibility with any one release of .NET would silence a lot of FUD by Microsoft and make pointy-haired bosses less reluctant to sign checks for deploying .NET/Mono applications on non-Microsoft platforms. If it's you who are developing, it's easy to code around the holes, but if you need a closed-source application designed to run on .NET (and I don't know why people want these things, but they do) you have little to no choice but going Microsoft. And that's a dealbreaker for Mono more often than you imagine.
jasonkester 17y ago
You've piqued my curiosity. What are you using Mono for if not to run C# outside of Windows?
- arebop 17y ago
  For one thing, there are lots of C# programs that can run on Mono outside of Windows, even if some parts of .NET are not yet implemented.
- h1bored 17y ago
  We're running C# code, and increasingly some F#, but not at all interested in taking desktop or web applications from Windows and dropping them onto Macs or Linux. We're historically a microsoft shop but recently (in the last 18 months or so) have started running linux backend servers for many of our services running on EC2. If I wanted to be buzzword compliant I'm sure I could come up with some string of cloud nonsense to describe it. We have something that looks kinda like Hadoop crossed with an app server that we can deploy components in. I'd be happier with a solid final version of Mono.Simd rather than slavishly filling in any missing parts of older .net.
  - jasonkester 17y ago
    Sounds like we're doing similar stuff. The code I'd like to run under Mono is neither ASP.NET nor WinForms. It's plain vanilla string processing and HttpRequesting with some minor crypto and SSL thrown in to use AWS. That's the stuff I'd expect to be there and it's not.
    - migueldeicaza 17y ago
      Care to detail exactly what is missing? And if you do not know what is missing, download our tool, and it will do the work for you: www.mono-project.com/Moma
      - jasonkester 17y ago
        That's the fun part. The tool says everything is good to go. That's partially why I felt so burned by it, having assurances that everything I was doing was implemented. Running the code, it doesn't even thow. It just quietly exits. After a few weeks running into issues like that, I just quietly exited myself. Windows EC2 boxes are only 25% more expensive than Linux ones, and they run .NET natively and correctly, so my particular problem is solved.
- anshul 17y ago
  I have never programmed with .NET (been coding exclusively in linux for years), but the framework looks interesting and the WPF has caught my eye. I will probably be one of those who will be exclusively learning the mono version of the .NET story and C#/F#. Though I guess there are very few people in my boat.
- embeddedradical 17y ago
  i also use mono on ubuntu. if the scope is larger than what i want to do in a scripting language, like bash, then i use c#. it's a great language. i have my eye on mvc support in mono, because if all goes well, i can save a lot of money on windows 2008 licenses.

by h1bored 17y ago

rbanffy 17y ago

I am quite sure that complete compatibility with any one release of .NET would silence a lot of FUD by Microsoft and make pointy-haired bosses less reluctant to sign checks for deploying .NET/Mono applications on non-Microsoft platforms. If it's you who are developing, it's easy to code around the holes, but if you need a closed-source application designed to run on .NET (and I don't know why people want these things, but they do) you have little to no choice but going Microsoft. And that's a dealbreaker for Mono more often than you imagine.

jasonkester 17y ago

You've piqued my curiosity. What are you using Mono for if not to run C# outside of Windows?

arebop 17y ago
For one thing, there are lots of C# programs that can run on Mono outside of Windows, even if some parts of .NET are not yet implemented.
h1bored 17y ago
We're running C# code, and increasingly some F#, but not at all interested in taking desktop or web applications from Windows and dropping them onto Macs or Linux. We're historically a microsoft shop but recently (in the last 18 months or so) have started running linux backend servers for many of our services running on EC2. If I wanted to be buzzword compliant I'm sure I could come up with some string of cloud nonsense to describe it. We have something that looks kinda like Hadoop crossed with an app server that we can deploy components in. I'd be happier with a solid final version of Mono.Simd rather than slavishly filling in any missing parts of older .net.
- jasonkester 17y ago
  Sounds like we're doing similar stuff. The code I'd like to run under Mono is neither ASP.NET nor WinForms. It's plain vanilla string processing and HttpRequesting with some minor crypto and SSL thrown in to use AWS. That's the stuff I'd expect to be there and it's not.
  - migueldeicaza 17y ago
    Care to detail exactly what is missing? And if you do not know what is missing, download our tool, and it will do the work for you: www.mono-project.com/Moma
    - jasonkester 17y ago
      That's the fun part. The tool says everything is good to go. That's partially why I felt so burned by it, having assurances that everything I was doing was implemented. Running the code, it doesn't even thow. It just quietly exits. After a few weeks running into issues like that, I just quietly exited myself. Windows EC2 boxes are only 25% more expensive than Linux ones, and they run .NET natively and correctly, so my particular problem is solved.
anshul 17y ago
I have never programmed with .NET (been coding exclusively in linux for years), but the framework looks interesting and the WPF has caught my eye. I will probably be one of those who will be exclusively learning the mono version of the .NET story and C#/F#. Though I guess there are very few people in my boat.
embeddedradical 17y ago
i also use mono on ubuntu. if the scope is larger than what i want to do in a scripting language, like bash, then i use c#. it's a great language. i have my eye on mvc support in mono, because if all goes well, i can save a lot of money on windows 2008 licenses.