How C# is plateform indepentend while we are getting exe file

[Saood]

[Kunle Odutola]

"AJ Armstrong" <nospamfor_ajarmstrong@ttg-inc.com> wrote in message
news:3b17b3de$1@news.devx.com...

> Second, you are confusing the compiled result with the development
language.
> All high-level languages are 'platform independant' to the extent that it
is
> possible to write a compiler to convert the language to platform-specific
> machine code. Similarly, Java is only 'platform independant' to the extant
> that an awful lot of people worked very hard to develop platform-specific
> virtual machines for it to run on.

Actually Java the language *isn't* platform independent. It is tied to the
Java platform. The Java platform however has implementations that run on
many OS platforms.

> And there's the rub - for the .Net family of languages to be platform
> independant will require that (take Linux, for example) someone writes an
> MSIL (the intermediate form of compiled .Net apps) interpreter/compiler
for
> Linux (a major, but not daunting project) and a set of .Net Framework
> Libraries for Linux (a daunting project).
>
> Anyone want to start? Let call it the LINUCS (C Sharp for Linux) project.

MS has an option to get Corel to do the work within 12 months if I
remember...

Kunle

[AJ Armstrong]

"Saood" <collectorinspain@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3b178a90@news.devx.com...
>
>

First of all, I don't think anyone has claimed that C# is platform
independant, only that it could be - because MS is submitting the language
spec to standards bodies and will permit third parties to build development
suites/ compilers for C#.

Second, you are confusing the compiled result with the development language.
All high-level languages are 'platform independant' to the extent that it is
possible to write a compiler to convert the language to platform-specific
machine code. Similarly, Java is only 'platform independant' to the extant
that an awful lot of people worked very hard to develop platform-specific
virtual machines for it to run on.

And there's the rub - for the .Net family of languages to be platform
independant will require that (take Linux, for example) someone writes an
MSIL (the intermediate form of compiled .Net apps) interpreter/compiler for
Linux (a major, but not daunting project) and a set of .Net Framework
Libraries for Linux (a daunting project).

Anyone want to start? Let call it the LINUCS (C Sharp for Linux) project.



-AJA

[Jonathan Allen]

> Actually Java the language *isn't* platform independent. It is tied to the
> Java platform. The Java platform however has implementations that run on
> many OS platforms.

Don't start that battle again. The last thing we need is another argument
over exactly what is a platform.

--
Jonathan Allen


"Kunle Odutola okocha.freeserve.co.uk>" <kunle.odutola@<REMOVETHIS> wrote in
message news:3b17b62e@news.devx.com...
>
> "AJ Armstrong" <nospamfor_ajarmstrong@ttg-inc.com> wrote in message
> news:3b17b3de$1@news.devx.com...
>
> > Second, you are confusing the compiled result with the development
> language.
> > All high-level languages are 'platform independant' to the extent that
it
> is
> > possible to write a compiler to convert the language to
platform-specific
> > machine code. Similarly, Java is only 'platform independant' to the
extant
> > that an awful lot of people worked very hard to develop
platform-specific
> > virtual machines for it to run on.
>
> Actually Java the language *isn't* platform independent. It is tied to the
> Java platform. The Java platform however has implementations that run on
> many OS platforms.
>
> > And there's the rub - for the .Net family of languages to be platform
> > independant will require that (take Linux, for example) someone writes
an
> > MSIL (the intermediate form of compiled .Net apps) interpreter/compiler
> for
> > Linux (a major, but not daunting project) and a set of .Net Framework
> > Libraries for Linux (a daunting project).
> >
> > Anyone want to start? Let call it the LINUCS (C Sharp for Linux)
project.
>
> MS has an option to get Corel to do the work within 12 months if I
> remember...
>
> Kunle
>
>

[GJ]

It goes deeper than that. MS is trying to standardize the common language
runtime, and I believe they submitted MSIL to ECMA. Basically, they are advertising
that eventually, the .NET framework will run on many different platforms,
just as JVM does now. Once that happens, your C# code will be platform independent,
because the MSIL it got compiled to can be run on any platform that is .NET
capable.


>First of all, I don't think anyone has claimed that C# is platform
>independant, only that it could be - because MS is submitting the language
>spec to standards bodies and will permit third parties to build development
>suites/ compilers for C#.

[Kunle Odutola]

"Michael (michka) Kaplan" <former_mvp@spamfree.trigeminal.nospam.com> wrote
in message news:3b1833ee$1@news.devx.com...
> Microsoft also once heavily pushed OS/2. They pushed Apple and the Mac.
> ****, they even pushed Java once. Now they push standardizing all these
..NET
> things?
>
> All this is just proving that MS is not stupid. They are hedging their
bets.
> If they succeed in winning over Linux and the rest, then they win. If they
> do not then the door is open for them to be over there too, and they will
> still win. The goal from their side is to be everywhere, so that no matter
> who wins, they get to win, too!

There is a difference though. If the ECMA stnadardisation effort is
completed and we end up with an implementable standard, *anyone* can
implement it. MS is no longer in control of who gets to do what AFAIK. I
know of an [embryonic] open source project to do just that.

You are right about MS hedging it's bets though. It always does.

Kunle

PS Me, I'm just waiting for someone to port the GNU Java project and a
decent JVM over to C#. I belive it will run almost as well as the current
Java offerings. That would be *really* interesting...