Dexxta - 2005-09-12 10:12 PM
Zapper - 2005-09-13 1:36 PM
The CLR and container is explicitly defined and open to replicate..
I wasnt going to reply, cause I know what an old fuddy I am and how stuck in my ways. But realisticly do you think MS will let anyone make a framework as operational as theirs is? Or if anyone has the time to do it too.
I know it still needs time to mature, but I dont like relying on a framework. I suppose it stems back to my hatred of Java and .NET's closeness to it. Same reasons I dont use MFC and the likes too I assume.
Just ignore my old man rantings..
From what I know, the CLR or .NET framework is really open for implementation. The strength behind the MS solution is really not just the .NET framework, but the ease of development using the Visual Studio .NET, that integrates all the functionality of writing .NET components into it.
While .NET is often touted to be cross-platform, one of its
(other
) key strength is in cross-languages. The CLR is the first MS runtime solution that allows disparate languages to use and consume the same system libraries natively, without some arm-twisting.
Having said that, the standard VS.NET IDE comes with VB.NET, VC++, C# ready to go. I think the enterprise or architect version comes with fortran or something. The idea is that developers can leverage whatever language that they are comfortable in, and which may be well suited for certain application, and be able to code seamlessly, consuming both common system libraries/components and user components across languages.
I don't know how the industry took to it, but I think both the cross language and cross platform features are capitalized by customers in general, though mileage may vary. And I believe even when these are implemented, its more often than not, not open for public consumtion, so in most cases, the CLR/.NET cross platform concept
dream would remain more or less a dream ...