Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com From: jeff AT i33 DOT com Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 07:43:09 -0500 (EST) X-Sender: jsturm AT suzy DOT i33 DOT com To: "Karin E. Hacker" cc: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com, mingw-users AT lists DOT sourceforge DOT net, dev-cpp-users AT lists DOT sourceforge DOT net Subject: Re: [Mingw-users] RE: The developer's dilemma In-Reply-To: <002b01c1bf26$b7925e90$2800000a@Computereng.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII On Tue, 26 Feb 2002, Karin E. Hacker wrote: > "This is because Microsoft introduced the concept of the CLR, or common > language runtime. What that means is two of the languages offered by > Microsoft, VB.Net and C#, both share the same runtime." > - > > Dose anyone else out there in the GCC universe feel the slightest twinge of > irritation at the fact that Microsoft is once again getting credit for > another stolen and repackaged concept? Not quite sure what you mean. What's novel about the CLR is that all languages utilizing the CLR share a common object model. Implement a class in one language, instances are visible in another language: methods, properties and all. It also allows for classes to be derived in languages other from those in which the base class is written. GCC doesn't really have the same concept. The GNU C++, Fortran, Ada and Java runtimes are all disjoint. The closest it comes is that gcj (GNU Java) objects are visible to g++. But the reverse is not true, so it is an assymetric relationship. Jeff -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/