4 ms·

MS to open source .NET micro framework

12 points by ananthrk 17y ago

daeken 17y ago
This is definitely interesting, but I'd love to see other .NET framework implementations open sourced as well. The micro framework is the only one I know of that doesn't JIT the code, but rather interprets CIL directly, and it also uses a simple mark-and-sweep GC. Since footprint is the main constraint here, it'd be nice to see an optimizing CIL compiler combined with this to produce native images. You could cut a whole lot of code out of the runtime by doing so, while increasing performance by a huge amount.
- ananthrk 17y ago
  Have you seen Rotor? (http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=8C09FD61-3F26-4555-AE17-3121B4F51D4D&displaylang=en http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=8C0...)
  - daeken 17y ago
    Rotor is not open source. It uses a shared source license which would taint me, making it impossible for me to work safely on any other .NET implementation.
    - bad_user 17y ago
      That's a PITA since I was planing on studying it. Are you sure? Do you have any references?
      - daeken 17y ago
        This is more focused on the .NET Class Libraries, but Rotor falls under this as well. From Miguel de Icaza: http://tirania.org/blog/archive/2007/Oct-03.html http://tirania.org/blog/archive/2007/Oct-03.html
pilif 17y ago
Not to be pessimistic here, but I'm sure some members of the free software community will find something bad in this again and will make this just yet another reason to explain why using Mono will kill Linux. In fact, I'd be willing to bet on that. boycott novel? where are you if I need you to win a bet?
- nzmsv 17y ago
  Mono won't kill Linux. It just doesn't really matter, that's all. There are equivalent (or better) tools available in the open-source world. The problem with this announcement (here I go with the problem :) is it doesn't really tell us whether there is a long-term commitment behind it. Only time will tell. This can be a case of "look at Google getting all the love with an open-source mobile platform, let's give these geeks some code". Code just isn't everything. If MS wants to encourage adoption of their open-source framework, they have to put someone in charge of it, and have that someone talk to the community. Think Guido and Python. The article does mention assigning people to do this job. Let's see how well they do. One press release does not a development platform make.
  - bad_user 17y ago
    I'm really happy with this announcement. Microsoft is a trend-setter and whatever the reasons behind this "opening" it really sets a powerful precedent for future projects getting open-sourced by companies ... and developers/entrepreneurs that believe in the power of commons are wining the fight. > There are equivalent (or better) tools available in the open-source world. No, not really. .NET approaches the strengths of Java ... high-performance, lots of available libraries and tools, lots of programmers working with it. Besides Java and C/C++, it doesn't have any direct competition, and C/C++ is a mess. I'm working on a project right now in my free time. Because I do lots of number-crunching on large data-sets I just couldn't afford to do it in something like Python or Perl (my favorites) ... it doesn't have to be optimized, but it does have to complete in a reasonable time without me thinking about all the implications of every god-damn line of code I write. My server resources are also limited, my VM only has 2 GB of RAM / 2 cores with 1 GHz and I can't afford another server. The only reasonable alternative for me is Java, but I hate Java. I tried porting my initial Python prototype to it and the results where awful. C# is very much alike Java, but its more bearable, and some stuff like Linq is just sweet. Not to mention that from within .NET I can also use Java libraries through IKVM.NET ... I'm already using OpenNLP through it. And there are also people working on Python interoperability ... IronPython is great, and there are people working on Ironclad, an interface allowing to use CPython extensions (like numpy, that already passes 1100 tests). > Code just isn't everything No, but the code + license is everything. The whole point of open-source licenses is that people and companies can't be trusted, and when you're really unhappy you can just fork. I'm also happy with the design of many things coming out of Microsoft. I'm not happy with Guido's ideas or with many choices in Python's design ... I only prefer Python because of its large community and available libraries. If you think the community has anything to say about Python's future, think again ... there's always a core that sets directions, and any community is created through natural-selection ... people wouldn't use Python if they wouldn't agree with a majority of Guido's choices. This is a good thing, please stop portraying as something bad.
rbanffy 17y ago
Did we see Microsoft making a statement saying they will give up the right to sue any entity using said code for patent infringement? Until then, this is just PR fluff. And, potentially, a trap too.
- urlwolf 17y ago
  Actually, MS releasing open source stuff is a good thing. If all the kids do it (google, MS), then Apple would look even more closed if it doesn't. Any releasing open source at all is good news. Why? because I can imagine how this can culminate on a world where the PR/marketing depts see it as a powerful way to woo audiences (remember devs's standing ovation -and raising their laptops- to the Wave presentation?). The sooner this 'clicks' on any marketing high-up at Apple, the better.
  - ZeroGravitas 17y ago
    http://www.apple.com/opensource/ http://www.apple.com/opensource/ http://opensource.apple.com/ http://opensource.apple.com/ http://www.macosforge.org/ http://www.macosforge.org/
  - rbanffy 17y ago
    I am sorry to tell you, but as long as Microsoft uses licenses that are open-source but permit them to sue users for patent violations, as they threatened many times in the past, their "openness" has a lot of suspicion attached.

12 points by ananthrk 17y ago

This is definitely interesting, but I'd love to see other .NET framework implementations open sourced as well. The micro framework is the only one I know of that doesn't JIT the code, but rather interprets CIL directly, and it also uses a simple mark-and-sweep GC. Since footprint is the main constraint here, it'd be nice to see an optimizing CIL compiler combined with this to produce native images. You could cut a whole lot of code out of the runtime by doing so, while increasing performance by a huge amount.

ananthrk 17y ago
Have you seen Rotor? (http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=8C09FD61-3F26-4555-AE17-3121B4F51D4D&displaylang=en http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=8C0...)
- daeken 17y ago
  Rotor is not open source. It uses a shared source license which would taint me, making it impossible for me to work safely on any other .NET implementation.
  - bad_user 17y ago
    That's a PITA since I was planing on studying it. Are you sure? Do you have any references?
    - daeken 17y ago
      This is more focused on the .NET Class Libraries, but Rotor falls under this as well. From Miguel de Icaza: http://tirania.org/blog/archive/2007/Oct-03.html http://tirania.org/blog/archive/2007/Oct-03.html

pilif 17y ago

Not to be pessimistic here, but I'm sure some members of the free software community will find something bad in this again and will make this just yet another reason to explain why using Mono will kill Linux. In fact, I'd be willing to bet on that. boycott novel? where are you if I need you to win a bet?

nzmsv 17y ago
Mono won't kill Linux. It just doesn't really matter, that's all. There are equivalent (or better) tools available in the open-source world. The problem with this announcement (here I go with the problem :) is it doesn't really tell us whether there is a long-term commitment behind it. Only time will tell. This can be a case of "look at Google getting all the love with an open-source mobile platform, let's give these geeks some code". Code just isn't everything. If MS wants to encourage adoption of their open-source framework, they have to put someone in charge of it, and have that someone talk to the community. Think Guido and Python. The article does mention assigning people to do this job. Let's see how well they do. One press release does not a development platform make.
- bad_user 17y ago
  I'm really happy with this announcement. Microsoft is a trend-setter and whatever the reasons behind this "opening" it really sets a powerful precedent for future projects getting open-sourced by companies ... and developers/entrepreneurs that believe in the power of commons are wining the fight. > There are equivalent (or better) tools available in the open-source world. No, not really. .NET approaches the strengths of Java ... high-performance, lots of available libraries and tools, lots of programmers working with it. Besides Java and C/C++, it doesn't have any direct competition, and C/C++ is a mess. I'm working on a project right now in my free time. Because I do lots of number-crunching on large data-sets I just couldn't afford to do it in something like Python or Perl (my favorites) ... it doesn't have to be optimized, but it does have to complete in a reasonable time without me thinking about all the implications of every god-damn line of code I write. My server resources are also limited, my VM only has 2 GB of RAM / 2 cores with 1 GHz and I can't afford another server. The only reasonable alternative for me is Java, but I hate Java. I tried porting my initial Python prototype to it and the results where awful. C# is very much alike Java, but its more bearable, and some stuff like Linq is just sweet. Not to mention that from within .NET I can also use Java libraries through IKVM.NET ... I'm already using OpenNLP through it. And there are also people working on Python interoperability ... IronPython is great, and there are people working on Ironclad, an interface allowing to use CPython extensions (like numpy, that already passes 1100 tests). > Code just isn't everything No, but the code + license is everything. The whole point of open-source licenses is that people and companies can't be trusted, and when you're really unhappy you can just fork. I'm also happy with the design of many things coming out of Microsoft. I'm not happy with Guido's ideas or with many choices in Python's design ... I only prefer Python because of its large community and available libraries. If you think the community has anything to say about Python's future, think again ... there's always a core that sets directions, and any community is created through natural-selection ... people wouldn't use Python if they wouldn't agree with a majority of Guido's choices. This is a good thing, please stop portraying as something bad.

rbanffy 17y ago

Did we see Microsoft making a statement saying they will give up the right to sue any entity using said code for patent infringement? Until then, this is just PR fluff. And, potentially, a trap too.

urlwolf 17y ago
Actually, MS releasing open source stuff is a good thing. If all the kids do it (google, MS), then Apple would look even more closed if it doesn't. Any releasing open source at all is good news. Why? because I can imagine how this can culminate on a world where the PR/marketing depts see it as a powerful way to woo audiences (remember devs's standing ovation -and raising their laptops- to the Wave presentation?). The sooner this 'clicks' on any marketing high-up at Apple, the better.
- ZeroGravitas 17y ago
  http://www.apple.com/opensource/ http://www.apple.com/opensource/ http://opensource.apple.com/ http://opensource.apple.com/ http://www.macosforge.org/ http://www.macosforge.org/
- rbanffy 17y ago
  I am sorry to tell you, but as long as Microsoft uses licenses that are open-source but permit them to sue users for patent violations, as they threatened many times in the past, their "openness" has a lot of suspicion attached.