4 ms·

Mono 3.10.0

35 points by merrua 12y ago

sibartlett 12y ago
Mono 3.10.0 is the latest version of Mono (released over the weekend); not 3.8.0
- misnome 12y ago
  Release notes appear to be: http://www.mono-project.com/docs/about-mono/releases/3.10.0/ http://www.mono-project.com/docs/about-mono/releases/3.10.0/ Weirdly, 3.8.0 is the "latest" news release on their page.
  - CmonDev 12y ago
    Well, both releases are nice, thanks for posting :)
- zaphar 12y ago
  Mono's package appears to lag behind their code releases by a significant amount. So while you can download and build the source for 3.10 right now you can not download the packaged mdk's as easily. At least it's not trivial to find them anyway. I'm not sure of why this is.
  - coldtea 12y ago
    Where "significant amount" = a day or so?
    - zaphar 12y ago
      In recent experience it seemed to be weeks. Maybe I'm just not watching the right channels though.
CoffeeDregs 12y ago
I've always wondered at the performance of Mono relative to the Real C#, but I suspect that Microsoft has language in the license to prevent such benchmarks (or something)... Some benchmarks are in the Game. Looking over the benchmarks, I realized that I shouldn't be comparing Mono to the Real C# since I wouldn't ever run Mono on Windows. I'd only ever run it on Linux, so, if you're running a Linux stack, Mono should be compared to its colleagues in the Linux space. Mono vs Java: http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/csharp.php Mono vs Go : http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=csharp&lang2=go Mono vs Rust: http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=csharp&lang2=rust
- pjmlp 12y ago
  With the caveat language != implementation.
  - bunderbunder 12y ago
    True, but FWIW that site is somewhat admirable for at least trying to cut implementation out & focus on language. For example, see the documentation for the binary-trees test: http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/performance.php?test=binarytrees http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/performance.php... There are a bunch of notes trying to make it very explicit that this test is supposed to isolate the garbage collector's performance. So they discourage lazy evaluation on the grounds that it might not produce the kind of allocation pattern the test is supposed to generate, and there's that bold admonition against memory management hacks, and all of that. I'm sure there's still plenty room for gaming the system, but looking at the actual C# & Java implementations for the test reveal that by-and-large they really are roughly equivalent. In particular, the C# doesn't resort to any obvious dirty trick like declaring the tree node datatype as a struct rather than a class. The upshot being, what that particularly test suggests is something that probably shouldn't come as much surprise: Mono's gc, while good, isn't quite as performant as HotSpot's.
    - pjmlp 12y ago

Mono 3.10.0

35 points by merrua 12y ago

sibartlett 12y ago

Mono 3.10.0 is the latest version of Mono (released over the weekend); not 3.8.0

misnome 12y ago
Release notes appear to be: http://www.mono-project.com/docs/about-mono/releases/3.10.0/ http://www.mono-project.com/docs/about-mono/releases/3.10.0/ Weirdly, 3.8.0 is the "latest" news release on their page.
- CmonDev 12y ago
  Well, both releases are nice, thanks for posting :)
zaphar 12y ago
Mono's package appears to lag behind their code releases by a significant amount. So while you can download and build the source for 3.10 right now you can not download the packaged mdk's as easily. At least it's not trivial to find them anyway. I'm not sure of why this is.
- coldtea 12y ago
  Where "significant amount" = a day or so?
  - zaphar 12y ago
    In recent experience it seemed to be weeks. Maybe I'm just not watching the right channels though.

CoffeeDregs 12y ago

I've always wondered at the performance of Mono relative to the Real C#, but I suspect that Microsoft has language in the license to prevent such benchmarks (or something)... Some benchmarks are in the Game. Looking over the benchmarks, I realized that I shouldn't be comparing Mono to the Real C# since I wouldn't ever run Mono on Windows. I'd only ever run it on Linux, so, if you're running a Linux stack, Mono should be compared to its colleagues in the Linux space. Mono vs Java: http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/csharp.php Mono vs Go : http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=csharp&lang2=go Mono vs Rust: http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=csharp&lang2=rust

pjmlp 12y ago
With the caveat language != implementation.
- bunderbunder 12y ago
  True, but FWIW that site is somewhat admirable for at least trying to cut implementation out & focus on language. For example, see the documentation for the binary-trees test: http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/performance.php?test=binarytrees http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/performance.php... There are a bunch of notes trying to make it very explicit that this test is supposed to isolate the garbage collector's performance. So they discourage lazy evaluation on the grounds that it might not produce the kind of allocation pattern the test is supposed to generate, and there's that bold admonition against memory management hacks, and all of that. I'm sure there's still plenty room for gaming the system, but looking at the actual C# & Java implementations for the test reveal that by-and-large they really are roughly equivalent. In particular, the C# doesn't resort to any obvious dirty trick like declaring the tree node datatype as a struct rather than a class. The upshot being, what that particularly test suggests is something that probably shouldn't come as much surprise: Mono's gc, while good, isn't quite as performant as HotSpot's.
  - pjmlp 12y ago