 h a l f b a k e r y OK, we're here. Now what?
idea:
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, best, random
meta:
news, help, about, links, report a problem
account:
Browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
Login
Create account.
|
|
| Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
| |
Baked. Microsoft's Common Language Runtime is meant for just this. There are several compilers that compile for the CLR, and there are runtimes for non-windows machines, but the whole thing is pretty Windows biased. |
|
| |
[Thod], I know I'm splitting hairs here, but I've got to slightly disagree with .NET being windows biased. In fact, as I understand it, one of the design goals of the .NET system is to provide a mechanism to step away from Windows somewhat. Theoretically, a .NET app will run on any system supporting the .NET subsystem. |
|
| |
In fact, you might argue that it's the least windows-centric development system ever to come out of Microsoft (I'm ignoring the old DOS stuff). |
|
| |
I was skeptical at first, but I started developing in .NET shortly after it was introduced. In my opinion, it's an example of some rather top-notch thinking. I'm sold on it. |
|
| |
Baked in the 60's. It was called UNCOL. A compiler company called 3L also wrote compilers for about a dozen different languages which compiled to something very similar to .net's CLR (it was called I-Code) (that was between 1976 and about 1990 I think) |
|
| |