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.
dynamic compilation and libraries
by Anonymous on Fri 21st May 2004 06:10 UTC

I wonder why people insist
on doing dynamic compilation.
Why is it better than compiling statically?

Have you ever done a ldd
on a Gnome or KDE application? Do it, it's instructive.
There are about 50 dynamic libraries linked in.
Can you imagine the same thing on a complex Mono platform? How it the code going to be managed? The dynamic linker/OS do a nice job at managing shared libs now, but with dynamic translation, and multiple users this will all be a mess.

Mono people should consider hooking up their compiler front-end with GCC. With the new TREE-SSA interface this is quite easy (see the lwn.net article).
That way mono could be used to produce native code.
Something that can produce IL bytecodes can be hooked up to TREE-SSA, and then you can get access to all the GCC languages.

Food for thought.