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.
Thread beginning with comment 453361
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Evil Companies
by fran on Mon 13th Dec 2010 22:04 UTC in reply to "Evil Companies"
fran
Member since:
2010-08-06

MS is not going all altruistic on us now.
NOPE not really

http://news.slashdot.org/story/10/12/12/1327248/Microsoft-Seeks-1-C...

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Evil Companies
by Treeno on Mon 13th Dec 2010 22:56 in reply to "RE: Evil Companies"
Treeno Member since:
2010-12-13

I was thinking about free software development. If we see what happened to Java and now, not surprisingly, learn that C# is not an option, I wonder what is now a good, free, proven, modern, static checked programming language with a state of the art IDE that supports multiple platforms that could become a successor of C/C++?

The open source community seems to have very strong solutions when it comes to dynamic languages, but not so much for statically checked ones?

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Evil Companies
by Treeno on Mon 13th Dec 2010 22:59 in reply to "RE[2]: Evil Companies"
Treeno Member since:
2010-12-13

Eiffel to the rescue! :-)

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Evil Companies
by TheGZeus on Mon 13th Dec 2010 23:10 in reply to "RE[2]: Evil Companies"
TheGZeus Member since:
2010-05-19

Haskell, Erlang...
There are others, too.
If you require type checking, that kinda throws out CL, but there's Liskell if you want more flexibility of syntax than Haskell provides.
Everything starts obscure, so that's no argument in-and-of itself.

Both Haskell and Erlang actually have a relatively large number of useful libraries.

IDE? I'm not sure why one would want one, but some people _seem_ to want to program with a mouse...
I don't know anything about them, other than I... don't get it. Emacs user...

Reply Parent Score: 1