Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 13th Dec 2010 19:27 UTC, submitted by lemur2
Mono Project For the most time, I've been firmly in the largest camp when it comes to the Mono debate - the 'I don't care'-camp. With patent lawsuits being hotter than Lady Gaga right now, that changed. For good reason, so it seems; while firmly in the 'ZOMG-MICROSOFT-IS-T3H-EVILL!1!!ONE!'-camp, The-Source.com investigated the five most popular Mono applications, and the conclusion is clear: all of them implement a lot of namespaces which are not covered by Microsoft's community promise thing.
Permalink for comment 453426
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Some things to consider
by ushimitsudoki on Tue 14th Dec 2010 08:23 UTC in reply to "Some things to consider"
ushimitsudoki
Member since:
2009-05-30

1. Could you explain how "using Foo.Bar" followed by later "Method" (from Foo.Bar) to avoid actually typing "Foo.Bar.Method" is *not* using functionality from "Foo.Bar"?

It seems to me to be the very definition of using functionality from "Foo.Bar".

2. I'm not familar with any IDE that includes a bunch of boilerplate includes without the programmer setting it up to do so.

I suppose the all the developers for all the applications could be so sloppy that they are just needlessly including libraries they don't need, expect if you actually look thorough the code, you'll see they are being used, so that doesn't hold up, either.

Seriously, it's *Open Source*. Why speculate? Read the code for yourself.

Reply Parent Score: 1