Linked by Eugenia Loli on Fri 21st May 2004 01:17 UTC
Mono Project The tomato war between Red Hat, Novell and the developer Gnome community about Mono and its legal safety continued today. Novell's Nat Friedman and Miguel de Icaza replied to yesterday's editorial by Red Hat's Seth Nickell. Later, Red Hat's Havoc Pennington replied to Nat and Gnome's Andrew Sobala also threw a few (metallic) cents too. For future episodes, bookmark PlanetGnome (unverified rumors circulating on IRC claim that eggs might be used next if there is no sign of their lawyers meeting with Microsoft to try to give an end to the saga). In any case, you don't want to miss this.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
by Seo Sanghyeon on Fri 21st May 2004 05:22 UTC

"Are people really willing to drop back to incomplete language bindings (have to be rolled seperately, you know!) with a dozen different wrappers that all work strangely"

This is not fair. Are you aware of the fact that gtkmm(GTK+'s C++ binding), PyGTK(Python binding), and Guile binding is generated from the *same* interface definition? What do you mean by "have to be rolled separately"?

Yes, it's not completely automatic now, but the suggestion should be to improve interface definitions and wrapper generators, not spreading fear and promoting Mono mindlessly.

Concerning bindings require their own documentation and string usages and so on: That's inevitable. That's what makes gtkmm a true C++ binding, PyGTK a truly Pythonic binding, etc. I want a Pythonic binding for Python, not a syntax-skinned C# bastardized to look like Python. If I wanted to use C#-like string, I would use just C#, not Python.