[ale] .NET

[Geoffrey]

Mike Millson wrote:
> It sounds like a rip off of Java's JNDI.

What, you thought Microsoft came up with something original?  Hardly.

Netscape > IE
Java > activeX
Javascript > vbscript


> 
>     -----Original Message-----
>     *From:* Dennany, Jerome {D177~Roswell} [mailto:JEROME.DENNANY at ROCHE.COM]
>     *Sent:* Friday, November 01, 2002 1:26 PM
>     *To:* ALE
>     *Cc:* 'Eric Anderson'
>     *Subject:* RE: [ale] .NET
> 
> 
>      >I skimmed the article and it was interesting, but I am still a bit
>      >confused about something. If I create a set of class in a language
>     that
>      >supports multiple inheritance (C++, Eiffel, Perl) and use multiple
>      >inheritance, then according to what you said (and my skimming of the
>      >article) I would not be able to have interoperability to another
>      >language (i.e. have C# code make calls to my classes) since I
>     would have
>      >to run that code "unmanaged".
> 
>     No, this isn't quite it.  There would be interoperability, but since
>     the CLS does not support multiple inheritance, the 'borders' at
>     which APIs or public interfaces or methods are exposed must be
>     exposed in a manner that is consistant with the CLS.  For example,
>     if you wrote a class library that used genericity or multiple
>     inheritance internally, that would be fine, as long as those classes
>     were not exposed as public.  Perhaps you'd write accessor classes or
>     some wrapper type.
> 
>     The best example is probably a C# example:  C# allows unsigned ints
>     (through the uint type).  Code written with uints is fine, as long
>     as they are not made public accross language boundaries.  (IE, if a
>     VB.NET program tried to use a method that accepted a uint as a
>     parameter, we'd have problems.  VB.NET does not support the uint type).
> 
>     Notice that we haven't even touched on managed / unmanaged code
>     yet.  We are just talking about access modifiers (public, private, etc).
> 
>     So, you can do whatever you want "inside" your code, just be careful
>     that what you expose is CLS compliant.
> 
> 
>      >So basically I can program so that my code conforms to the Virtual
>      >Object System model of what an object looks like OR run my code as
>      >unmanaged and therefore loose the advantages of running under .NET
>     since
>      >my code is no longer accessible by other languages. Can my
>     "unmanaged"
>      >code call "managed" code (possibly written in another language)?
> 
>     I think that we're losing track of what "managed" means - it
>     primarily refers to memory management and garbage collection, not
>     the type system.
> 
>     But to anwer your question, yes, "unmanaged" code may call "managed"
>     code, and vice versa.  Quite a bit of work has been put into the
>     framework to automatically handle marshalling across the framework
>     boundaries through various interop classes.  COM can call .NET Code,
>     .NET code can call COM code, .NET code can call C-stype APIs, C++
>     can mix managed and unmanaged code, etc...  Pretty flexible.
> 
>      >Excuse my ignorance, but I have not read up on .NET as much as I
>     would
>      >like to.
> 
>     Of course, take everything I've said with a grain of salt - I don't
>     claim to be the expert in everything, either...
> 
> 
>     Jerry Dennany
> 

-- 
Until later: Geoffrey		esoteric at 3times25.net

I didn't have to buy my radio from a specific company to listen
to FM, why doesn't that apply to the Internet (anymore...)?


---
This message has been sent through the ALE general discussion list.
See http://www.ale.org/mailing-lists.shtml for more info. Problems should be 
sent to listmaster at ale dot org.