Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 12th Jun 2009 18:25 UTC
Permalink for comment 368591
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/25/13 0:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 23:59 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Howard Fosdick on 05/24/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 14:44 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2008-12-26
Perhaps it's just easier to "call bullshit" on the other claims of Microsoft, when they refer to technology not developed by them.
MonoDevelop is of course a redundant app for non-mono world.
Here's an interesting relevant link:
http://www.figuiere.net/hub/blog/?2009/04/01/656-porting-to-cpluspl...
It mentions:
So, I figure the porting will only get easier in the future. We might not hear of "line-by-line" port success stories of gnote, but the porting effort in itself doesn't seem insurmountable.
In any case, even if we were dealing with a reimplementation instead of port, it's still easier because you can copy architecture (class structure) and algorithms directly.
What I'm saying is - it's not necessary to be terribly worried about Mono, as long as we have a good backup strategy.