VMiklos wrote:
Hello,
Na Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 05:40:40PM +0300, Bozhidar Batsov <lordbad@e-card.bg> pisal(a):
Well I have no intention to fork Arch. I strive to make a product 100% compatible with the existing, but I want to offer through it a few things that are missing in pacman and a couple of newer technologies. I don't think that mono is a bad thing just because .NET is a Microsoft product. After all Miguel de Icaza has stated many times that if he had mono 8 years ago there wouldn't be one line of C code in GNOME. I personally consider it to be a much better framework than java. Style and consistency are almost perfect here. Pascal notation for methods, camel for vars, great generics, great datatypes, security...
let's say you would write this in python or perl, we would have the same problem: pacman is a lowlevel tool, it should be fast and have as less deps as possible. mono can be a great tool but are you sure it's nice to have the whole mono framework in an install cd?
- VMiklos
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ pacman-dev mailing list pacman-dev@archlinux.org http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/pacman-dev
Not exactly so. For one thing there are many popular programs build with mono today - beagle, f-spot, tomboy, muine and others so you are likely having the framework installed anyway. There are talks that soon mono will be accepted as an official dependency in GNOME. So having mono around won't be anything more that having perl or python say. But the C# source code is better structured, more secure and almost as fast as the C code(at least on a semi-modern machine), while the length of a similar application written in C and C# will be 3 to 5 times smaller in the C# version and the source itself would probably be easier to understand by people reading your apps. Mono is not large at all - the entire framework is about 25MB when packaged. I don't think that it want squeeze on an install cd.