Linked by Eugenia Loli on Sat 29th May 2004 15:39 UTC, submitted by t3rmin4t0r
Permalink for comment
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 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



What are the differentiators between this project and Mono?
. I can take my time to fix a problem the proper way .
First off , Mono is going in the direction of "Do all Programming in C#, even Gnome " , while Portable.net is going in "We're just here to let people run .NET" .. So Mono has Gtk#/Gnome# (whatever) and Portable.net has a nice Windows.Forms implementation.
Secondly, Portable.net's policy is "we'll provide what the user wants" of the typical volunteer project , while Mono has a Roadmap , Managers and things like that.
Portable.net has no paid developers , so it is pretty impressive that it is still in the running (after 3 years). Mono does have Ximian/Novell backing them with "real" money, while I work on DotGNU for "kicks". Unlike what most people might think, this results in better code IMHO, as I never have a schedule to adhere to ... or to hack up a fix
Mono has a huge community thanks to Miguel being Gnome Found er and all that , Portable.net unfortunately has about 5 active developers (of which the lead developer has not been that active on the main branch , recently thanks to the JIT).
Lastly Portable.net is developed mainly in Australia (where reverse engineering for compatibility is legal) , India (where there are no e-patents), New Zealand , Canada and only some bits in the US . Which cannot be said about Mono which is based right in USPTO's firing range.
GCC compilation won't solve the "I have this cool .NET .dll which I want to run on Platform X" problem which DotGNU's trying to solve. (but it would be cool anyway).
OTOH, Portable.net's C compiler does support some cool things (like pthreads already work) ... But we need more people to help us finish off printf support (that is not a JOKE).