Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 30th Jun 2009 21:29 UTC
We've had a lot of debates recently on the merits - or dangers - of Mono. We've had troubles with how Microsoft views Mono and whether or not everyone is safe using it, but we also had a public back-and-forth among Debian maintainers. During all this, Richard Stallman remained pretty mum on the issue, today he broke the silence on the FSF website.
Thread beginning with comment 371261
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Comment by mtzmtulivu
by vivainio on Thu 2nd Jul 2009 07:57
in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by mtzmtulivu"
Member since:2008-12-26
But why Mono? Why not Objective-C 2.0 which has all the yummy goodness of .NET without all the draw backs that come with it? why not work with Python and LLVM?
I'm a huge pythonista (that's the only language I volunteer my free time on), but I realize Python is not perfect for everything. Think of, say, a big application developed by changing team of 10 mediocre developers over a long period of time. Static typing probably is a big help there, as opposed to having a small team of good developers do an app with quick deadline (where Python shines). Isn't Objective C dynamically typed as well?
The point I was trying to make (which wasn't clear in my post) was that there are other technologies which have all the benefits of .NET but without the legal uncertainties of Mono.
I'm suggesting C++ & Qt4 for this same purpose - existence of which the Gnome community ever so conveniently ignores (perchance due to social reasons / community dynamics?).
RE[6]: Comment by mtzmtulivu
by kaiwai on Thu 2nd Jul 2009 09:26
in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by mtzmtulivu"
Member since:2005-07-06
I'm a huge pythonista (that's the only language I volunteer my free time on), but I realize Python is not perfect for everything. Think of, say, a big application developed by changing team of 10 mediocre developers over a long period of time. Static typing probably is a big help there, as opposed to having a small team of good developers do an app with quick deadline (where Python shines). Isn't Objective C dynamically typed as well?
Not too sure about the nature of Objective-C given I've just had a look but Objective-C 2.0 brings in garbage collection and a whole host of other ideas. The benefit is that you tap into a large number of programmers who are gradually migrating to Objective-C as Apple move developers to Cocoa.
Personally if I was GNOME I'd be cleaning up the whole desktop, adding Objective-C bindings and getting behind LLVM because so far the work Red hat, Novell and Ubuntu have been abysmal in regards to getting Linux up to speed with the desktop. All three have pretty much thrown in their towel when it comes to the desktop thus leaving one last company left who are actively investing into real solutions for end users and no pie in the sky half baked ideas.
What I mean by that is, look at all the things that Apple are contributing to (LLVM, improvements to Objective-C, contributions back to various projects used by GNOME, Webkit being the biggest of the lot) that of some real value; when are we going to see the big three actually do something about the horribly crap HAL for example which sucks up power like no bodies business; then there is the disjointed GNOME desktop where parts are continually in a state of flux in transition between gnome-vfs to gvfs based on gio.
I'm suggesting C++ & Qt4 for this same purpose - existence of which the Gnome community ever so conveniently ignores (perchance due to social reasons / community dynamics?).
Why not GTKmm or possibly create a Objective-C 2.0 wrapper to gtk. The rejection of Qt4 is understandable given that if one were going to do that, one might as well give up on GNOME altogether and work on KDE. I know I dream of that day when pragmatism and common sense prevail - when developers go, "why are we duplicating work when if we combine our energies we could steam roll over Microsoft", but I doubt it'll happen. Far too many egos and Prima donna's out there vying for the spotlight.
Edited 2009-07-02 09:30 UTC
Member since:
2005-07-06
But why Mono? Why not Objective-C 2.0 which has all the yummy goodness of .NET without all the draw backs that come with it? why not work with Python and LLVM? The point I was trying to make (which wasn't clear in my post) was that there are other technologies which have all the benefits of .NET but without the legal uncertainties of Mono.
I'm being honest here; I'm gradually working through and refresh my C skills - I've had a brief look at Objective-C and it seems a more logical step up from GNOME's C roots than taking the Mono tangent.