Re: UNCOL = Uncool?

vbdis@aol.com (VBDis) writes:


>"SRS" <sskaflot@online.no> schreibt:
>
>>The Microsoft initiative on the IR domain (.NET) seems interesting,
>>but I'm sure there will be absolutely no strategy to provide this
>>technology on non-Windows platforms.
>
>I only hear of assumptions, that something is limited to some
>platform. I really would appreciate more concrete arguments, which
>explain the immanent platform dependency of e.g. .NET.


The platform dependency of the .NET CLR is fundamentally a
commercial/political issue, not a technical one. There's no technical
reason why the CLR couldn't be port to or reimplemented on other
systems. But if you include all the APIs, it's a very large and
complex system. Re-implementing the whole system would be a lot of
work. Furthermore, MS have hundreds of programmers working on the
system, some of whom are already working on extensions for subsequent
versions, such as generics. So it will almost certainly be a moving
target.


In theory the Win32 API could be implemented on other OSs too.
And indeed there have been some attempts along those lines (e.g. Wine).
But thus far they have not been very successful in producing a
complete emulator in a reasonable period of time. The difficulty
of the task is exacerbated by the fact that it is a moving target.
--
Fergus Henderson <fjh@cs.mu.oz.au> | "I have always known that the pursuit
                                                                        | of excellence is a lethal habit"
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh> | -- the last words of T. S. Garp.

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.