On: Microsoft .NET CoreCLR is now running on FreeBSD 1...

[sbose78]

Could someone please explain how different this is from using Mono on Linux ? I mean internally that too would be running CoreCLR on the Unix-based system. Then what different did these guys accomplish?

[ghuntley → sbose78]

Mono = LGPL and CoreCLR/.NET = MIT

Mono (aka Xamarin) are getting out of the compiler/language reverse engineering game and focusing 100% on mobile. They no longer need to clean room the MSFT implementation because the MSR license as a purple-pill. Now that Microsoft has relicensed under MIT developers are arriving in droves.

Advantages? .NET everywhere, SINGLE reference implementation/specification means no more bugs.

edit: You can see the transformation of Xamarin -> Mobile and replacing internal components from CoreCLR over at https://trello.com/b/vRPTMfdz/net-framework-integration-into...

[txdv → ghuntley]

That transition could take a long time.

[jebblue → ghuntley]

I don't know about CoreCLR but with Mono I can run my .NET WinForms programs from the early 2000's right now.

[hamiltont → ghuntley]

> purple-pill

What does this mean? Googling it led to interpretations that I doubt apply here... ><

[lstamour → hamiltont]

I read it as an auto-corrected typo of "poison pill" :-)

http://www.neowin.net/news/microsofts-net-poison-pill

This news, however, is a very positive step. Can't wait for Build next week...

[ollyfg → lstamour]

I understood it as a halfway pill between the red pill and the blue pill from The Matrix, and subsequently got very confused. Looking at it as a typo makes a lot more sense!

[edmccard → sbose78]

>what different did these guys accomplish?

Instead of taking something like Mono that was pre-built to run on their system, they took the CoreClr source that did not have a working build for FreeBsd, and got it to the point that it did.