Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Android Ported To C#

Soulskill posted more than 2 years ago | from the did-not-see-that-one-coming dept.

Android 351

New submitter Eirenarch writes "Xamarin has just announced that they got the Java part of Android ported to C# via machine translation. The resulting OS, called XobotOS, is available on Github. They claim some serious performance gains over Dalvik. For them, this is an experiment that they are not planning to focus on, but they will be using some of the technologies in Mono for Android."

cancel ×

351 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Software Apocolypse... (5, Funny)

raydobbs (99133) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862423)

....this still won't save you from the Oracle software apocalypse [slashdot.org] .

Re:Software Apocolypse... (4, Funny)

nicholas22 (1945330) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862807)

If Oracle wins the suit, this project will be liable for damages to Google :) A brave new world indeed!

Re:Software Apocolypse... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39863233)

I think it would be great that if Oracle wins against Google, that Google remove all references to Oracle from all search results.

Re:Software Apocolypse... (2)

Isaac Remuant (1891806) | about 2 years ago | (#39863261)

But how will economists make accurate predictions without the source?

Brace for it (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39862449)

Brace for inevitable flood of fanboys and flamewars. This one is going to set off both the open sores zealots and the fandroids.

Can I run Android or iOS on my PC? (1)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862455)

I'd like to try them sometime.

Re:Can I run Android or iOS on my PC? (4, Informative)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862495)

Android was ported to x86 a few versions ago.

Re:Can I run Android or iOS on my PC? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39862509)

Yes, you can:
http://www.android-x86.org/
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1373161

Heck, even Eclipse has an emulator that could do the trick for you.

Re:Can I run Android or iOS on my PC? (4, Informative)

zill (1690130) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862537)

Yes, you can. There are two ways to go about it:

Download the Android SDK [android.com] which contains an Android emulator.

If you have any virtualization software installed, grab an Android x86 ISO image [android-x86.org] and run it in a VM.

The second method gets you higher performance (virtualization vs binary translation), but has major compatibility issues. Any app that contains ARM native code won't work in Android x86 unfortunately.

Re:Can I run Android or iOS on my PC? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39863223)

At the moment, yes. That might change, though.

There's now at least one phone available (in India, anyway) which runs an x86 (Intel Medfield) version of Android:

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/2012/04/the-first-intel-smartphone-comfortably-mid-range-eminently-credible.ars

It can run most apps that contain ARM native code, by using a JIT. I don't know if the source code for that is available anywhere, but it'd be useful for running Android on x86. It's also not that hard to port an Android on ARM app over to Android on x86 (generally, it's just a recompile), so if Intel make any headway with x86 phones, developers might start simply compiling all their apps for both ARM and x86.

I don't know if Intel will get very far with this. Right now, their solution is OK, but not competitive with high-end ARM SoCs. Give them a couple of iterations, and given Intel's enormous lead in manufacturing process, they might become competitive soon enough. Then it's a question of whether any phone manufacturer decides to use Intel over ARM, whether people actually buy such a phone, and whether developers decide to bother supporting both ARM and x86.

Android (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39862459)

Android ported to microsoft patent trap

Re:Android (5, Informative)

Goaway (82658) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862481)

1. The Microsoft patent grant for C# is more permissive than the patent grant for Java.
2. Oracle is suing Google over Java right now..

Re:Android (-1, Troll)

Trogre (513942) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862649)

Doesn't matter. Microsoft is a bigger, more evil giant than even Oracle. They will always, always try to screw you over.

Re:Android (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39862693)

Microsoft is a bigger, more evil giant than even Oracle.

I'm not entirely sure you've ever dealt with Oracle...

Re:Android (5, Funny)

Bobfrankly1 (1043848) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862935)

Microsoft is a bigger, more evil giant than even Oracle.

I'm not entirely sure you've ever dealt with Oracle...

Oracle vs Google is like "do no good" vs "do no evil".

Re:Android (4, Insightful)

gman003 (1693318) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862753)

Bigger? Perhaps. More evil? Not a chance in hell.

Re:Android (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39862803)

Doesn't matter. Microsoft is a bigger, more evil giant than even Oracle. They will always, always try to screw you over.

Oracle is perhaps the most evil of all the large software companies.

Re:Android (4, Insightful)

jd2112 (1535857) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862945)

Having dealt with both I can say Oracle is much more evil than Microsoft.

Re:Android (3, Interesting)

JAlexoi (1085785) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862865)

1. The Microsoft patent grant for C# is more permissive than the patent grant for Java.

Aaa.... No it's not. There is a defensive termination clause(I will be corrected if I'm wrong...) in Microsoft's grant, but not in Oracle's.

Re:Android (3, Interesting)

stephanruby (542433) | about 2 years ago | (#39863195)

1. The Microsoft patent grant for C# is more permissive than the patent grant for Java.

Are you a lawyer? I've been reading the promise Microsoft made, and it's all gibberish to me. And I doubt that even the original lawyer who drafted it would actually understand what he had written.

Re:Android (2, Funny)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862549)

Maybe if Google ships this Microsoft and Oracle will fight to the death over who gets to sue Google...

Re:Android (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39862593)

mono eats up batteries fast

Re:Android (4, Funny)

zill (1690130) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862597)

The order of the battle has already been decided. Oracle is the mini boss and Microsoft is the last boss.

Re:Android (5, Interesting)

rabtech (223758) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862725)

I can already tell you how that will turn out: Microsoft won't be suing anyone.

C# and the core runtime are ECMA standards with strong patent promises, meaning Microsoft explicitly gives everyone in the world the right to implement their own C# compiler and version of the System.* libraries.

Their open-ness with regard to the CLR and C# is far and away better than Sun did with Java. They even contributed DLR code to mono itself.

Not to mention how much better the language is... With real co/contra variant generics (type erasure? GTFU), first-class functions with delegates, closures, lambda expressions, and LINQ. Plus the new async/await stuff. On and type inference just makes things easier on a day to day coding basis.

Meanwhile Java has spent the last 10 years standing still. They couldn't even get closures into the latest release and from my understanding of the docs they aren't going to do true first-class closures anyway. It's a freakin joke of a language at this point.

Re:Android (1, Redundant)

nicholas22 (1945330) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862887)

Freaking joke of a language? It's the number 1 or 2 language in use today (along with C) if you consult language ranking sources... The reason it stood still for a few years is due to Sun going under. But we can't complain. Sun created Java and languages directly inspired by it (such as C#) owe a lot to them.

Re:Android (1)

svick (1158077) | more than 2 years ago | (#39863067)

I don't know about you, but at this point, I consider a general-purpose language without closures to be a joke. In my experience, they are very useful and I would find it hard to work on a large project without them.

Even C++ has closures now.

Re:Android (3, Interesting)

JonySuede (1908576) | about 2 years ago | (#39863209)

What are closures main advantage over anonymous class referring to final identifiers ?
Verbosity ?

c# what a lousy name (0)

ozduo (2043408) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862473)

with all the letters in the ascii table why can't you get past C http://www.asciitable.com/ [asciitable.com]

Re:c# what a lousy name (2)

AlephNaut (120505) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862543)

You don't play an instrument? I thought it was quite a clever name...

Re:c# what a lousy name (2, Funny)

zill (1690130) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862579)

No wonder C# never caught on. Microsoft grossly overestimated the cardinality of the intersection between the set of programming nerds and the set of music nerds.

Re:c# what a lousy name (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39862605)

Insert Db pun here.

(for those who don't get it: in music, generally speaking, the sharps and flats overlap. C sharp = D flat)

Re:c# what a lousy name (2)

RichardJenkins (1362463) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862733)

Generally, for those who don't get it: don't explain.

Re:c# what a lousy name (1)

jd2112 (1535857) | about 2 years ago | (#39863157)

They should have renamed ado.net as Db.net.

Re:c# what a lousy name (2)

ceoyoyo (59147) | about 2 years ago | (#39863167)

"(for those who don't get it: in music, generally speaking, the sharps and flats overlap. C sharp = D flat)"

Unless you're a music theorist.

Re:c# what a lousy name (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39862747)

Never caught on? ROLF. Pull your head out of the sand. There are more people being paid to write and maintain C# code then any other managed language. But hey, pick on it all you want.

Re:c# what a lousy name (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39862905)

Never caught on? ROLF. Pull your head out of the sand. There are more people being paid to write and maintain C# code then any other managed language. But hey, pick on it all you want.

I don't see how the compiler source code being hard to maintain is an indication of the success of the language.

Re:c# what a lousy name (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39862955)

Whooosh! (in D flat)

Re:c# what a lousy name (1)

darrenkopp (981266) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862787)

Pretty sure it's more a play on "a sharp c" by it's relation to c the language, rather than it being c# the music note.

Re:c# what a lousy name (1)

amicusNYCL (1538833) | about 2 years ago | (#39863191)

Microsoft grossly overestimated the cardinality of the intersection between the set of programming nerds and the set of music nerds.

I think you might be underestimating it. It turns out that the creative minds that enjoy programming also enjoy other creative things. I almost went to music school, actually. I wouldn't consider myself a "music nerd" even though I play guitar occasionally, but I certainly know what a C sharp is.

Re:c# what a lousy name (2)

ozmanjusri (601766) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862619)

While I do play an instrument, I prefer to call the language by it's real name, C-Hash.

At least that way, you're never in doubt about the goal of its creators.

Re:c# what a lousy name (1)

brianerst (549609) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862729)

Philistine! Everyone knows the proper pronunciation is C-Octothorpe!

Re:c# what a lousy name (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39862763)

C-hekje

Re:c# what a lousy name (1)

HelioWalton (1821492) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862825)

C Pound

Re:c# what a lousy name (1)

Tarlus (1000874) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862977)

C Number

Re:c# what a lousy name (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39862989)

C Pound

C£?

Re:c# what a lousy name (1)

Cylix (55374) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862847)

As every telecom expert knows...

C Pound.

Re:c# what a lousy name (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39862831)

Hash? I though it was a bunch of pluses squished together to save space. You're saying C# isn't C++++?

Wow, my mind's blown. Cue Lemmings' self-destruct animation: Grabs head and explodes!

Re:c# what a lousy name (0)

Trogre (513942) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862639)

Yes, but to interpret a hash (#) as "sharp" there is usually a previous musical context.

In my part of the woods, the Microsoft language is simply known as C hash.

Re:c# what a lousy name (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39862663)

Your part of the woods must be pretty retarded then.

Re:c# what a lousy name (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39862775)

About as retarded as Microsoft yup.

Re:c# what a lousy name (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39862947)

How could you say that? He's likely the only one there.

Re:c# what a lousy name (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39862741)

Would that be the back part of the woods then?

Re:c# what a lousy name (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39862761)

Microsoft clearly says it's pronounced C Sharp.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/kx37x362.aspx [microsoft.com]

C# (pronounced "C sharp") is a programming language that is designed for building a variety of applications that run on the .NET Framework. C# is simple, powerful, type-safe, and object-oriented. The many innovations in C# enable rapid application development while retaining the expressiveness and elegance of C-style languages.

-wmbetts

Re:c# what a lousy name (2)

admdrew (782761) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862771)

In my part of the woods, the Microsoft language is simply known as C hash.

Why (honestly curious)?

Re:c# what a lousy name (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39862873)

In the UK if you call up one of those automated voice menu things it will say "press hash" because there is no pound (£) button on telephones.

Re:c# what a lousy name (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39862779)

Modded offtopic, because there's no completely wrong mod.

Re:c# what a lousy name (1)

vux984 (928602) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862835)

In my part of the woods, the Microsoft language is simply known as C hash.

If you are going to be deliberately ignorant, why not call it C octothorpe?

Re:c# what a lousy name (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39862897)

Looked like C tic tac toe to me.

Re:c# what a lousy name (1)

larry bagina (561269) | about 2 years ago | (#39863163)

To interpret a pound (#) as "hash" there is usually a previous drug reference.

Re:c# what a lousy name (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39863333)

Erm... "C hash" is quite clearly wrong.

The symbol is actually a sharp symbol (a , rather than a #). It's usually typed as "#", because "" is a pain in the neck to type, but it definitely is a sharp symbol. It shows up basically anywhere it's represented graphically, from the splash screen, to the icons, official logos, and so on. Oddly, not on their own website, though...

The compiler's called "csc" - "C Sharp Compiler". The extension for source code is ".cs" - "C Sharp". A number of tools or libraries available have "sharp" in the name somewhere.

Re:c# what a lousy name (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39863327)

You don't play an instrument? I thought it was quite a clever name...

My language of choice would be D flat. But it all depends on whether or not you prefer reading 7 sharps over a much more user friendly 5 flats! Obviously C# would not be very user friendly for B flat woodwinds like a Sax or Clarinet!

Isn't Mono dead? (-1, Flamebait)

Jerry Atrick (2461566) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862483)

So what's the point?

Re:Isn't Mono dead? (1)

PlastikMissle (2498382) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862527)

Mono is dead? Since when?

Re:Isn't Mono dead? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39862545)

mono and mono programs was removed from ubuntu 12.04

Re:Isn't Mono dead? (1)

colinrichardday (768814) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862755)

No. Ubuntu 12.04 includes a lot of mono packages, including mono runtime.

Re:Isn't Mono dead? (1)

gbjbaanb (229885) | more than 2 years ago | (#39863099)

They removed mono from Ubuntu 12.04, if you want Tomboy (I think that's the only package it was added for) you'll have to download it and its dependencies yourself.

Re:Isn't Mono dead? (1)

bob')DROP TABLE user (2535244) | about 2 years ago | (#39863283)

Good point, I hear ubuntu is the only Linux distribution out there now too. Did they also remove the ability to install packages in 12.04 too?

Re:Isn't Mono dead? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39862547)

Xamarin is now behing mono and more focused than ever before now that they are independent from their former bosses at Novell.

Re:Isn't Mono dead? (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862603)

Didnt know it was dead, but i do agree why do this when java works fine for this 'use case' ?

Re:Isn't Mono dead? (1)

PlastikMissle (2498382) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862615)

From the README file: "XobotOS is a Xamarin research project that explored porting Android 4.0 from Java/Dalvik to C# to explore the performance and memory footprint benefits of C#."

Re:Isn't Mono dead? (2)

randy of the redwood (1565519) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862927)

Mono (Xamarin) is now more about a way to write mobile apps once, and have them run on both iPhone and Android with minimal porting. If you are a .NET shop (my company is), this is a good way to get efficient use of programmers rather than forcing them to context switch between C#, objective C and java. We have been very happy with the performance of several mobile apps developed on this platform, and have plans for more.

There doesn't seem to be a perfect option to write cross platform, and this does require some porting, but it seemed the best option when we evaluated the alternatives last year.

Java to C# is easy (1)

MrEricSir (398214) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862551)

Well, relatively easy, since at a bytecode level Java is a subset of CLR.

Now just try going from C# to Java.

Re:Java to C# is easy (-1, Flamebait)

ZeroSumHappiness (1710320) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862585)

Yeah, but I don't see why'd you use Mono on Linux when you have to run Windows underneath Linux anyway. I mean, you could just use MS's .NET instead. But you know these FOSS types love re-building the wheel.

Re:Java to C# is easy (1)

nonicknameavailable (1495435) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862625)

linux doesn't need windows underneath to work

Re:Java to C# is easy (0)

zill (1690130) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862675)

Yeah, but I don't see why'd you use Mono on Linux when you have to run Windows underneath Linux anyway.

What do you mean by "you have to run Windows underneath Linux anyway"? Are you talking about the Microsoft compatibility stack? I was under the impression that Mono was fully FOSS and not reliant on Microsoft code.

I agree with your overall point though; there are dozens of much better languages to develop in on Linux, none of which share C#'s patent uncertainties and dark origins.

Re:Java to C# is easy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39862793)

I was under the impression that Mono was fully FOSS and not reliant on Microsoft code.

It is, you just got trolled.

Re:Java to C# is easy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39862691)

Wow, Slashdot comments are reaching a new low.

Re:Java to C# is easy (1)

armanox (826486) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862795)

I think you need to explain your "Windows underneath Linux" remark. There is no Windows underneath Linux, and never was. And our wheel is less reinvented then Microsoft's...

Re:Java to C# is easy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39863049)

Loverock, is that you?

Trolling tips (1)

MrEricSir (398214) | more than 2 years ago | (#39863055)

Look, if you're going to troll that's fine. But at least make your trolling remarks internally consistent; first you complain that Mono requires Windows to run, then you claim it's unnecessary to create a fully FOSS CLR runtime.

Well, Windows is obviously not FOSS, so your two claims are mutually exclusive.

Or to put it another way: lern2trol.

Managed code to become irrelevant? (1)

IGnatius T Foobar (4328) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862595)

This may not matter. If the litigious bastards at Oracle have their way, future Android builds will migrate to "all native code" just like on the iPhone and other non-vm based devices. They'll just sadly set aside Dalvik and declare ARM to be the official ISA of Android phones, or do some crazy thing where applications are compiled (perhaps in the cloud?) before installation to a device. I don't see C#/CLR/Mono becoming part of the Android stack, not now, not ever. Google wouldn't abandon one third-party managed code environment only to embrace another. Perhaps what Google should do is settle the case: "We will pay you a royalty for every Android if you make Microsoft go away."

Re:Managed code to become irrelevant? (0)

mobby_6kl (668092) | more than 2 years ago | (#39863147)

This may not matter. If the litigious bastards at Oracle have their way, future Android builds will migrate to "all native code" just like on the iPhone and other non-vm based devices.

You say that like it's a bad thing. I hate Oracle too, but seriously, fuck Java, Oracle can keep it for themselves.

RUN FOR YOUR LIVES (1, Offtopic)

dominious (1077089) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862617)

I'm currently trying to learn the WPF in C# for a project and it just makes my life difficult! The combination of MVC, XML, LINQ and routed events just broke my ability to do real programming. You will really find yourself spend hours trying to do simple tasks and end up hacking up some weird solutions that will make your project into spaghetti code (talking about large projects at least).

Re:RUN FOR YOUR LIVES (2)

Qwertie (797303) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862679)

That's not really on-topic. Yes, WPF makes life difficult [blogspot.ca] , but Mono for Android doesn't even support WPF. On Android, you'll be using the same widgets in C# as Java developers do.

Re:RUN FOR YOUR LIVES (3, Funny)

FrootLoops (1817694) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862827)

I agree this is off-topic, but I really like WPF. It has a steep learning curve and a lot of quirks, but data binding, templates, and the layout system save a lot of time and make things look nice. The people complaining about WPF in your link often called themselves old; maybe that's the real problem (I'm quite young).

Re:RUN FOR YOUR LIVES (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39862687)

Don't confuse the clusterfuck that is WPF with the awesomeness of C#.

Re:RUN FOR YOUR LIVES (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39862697)

WPF and MVC in the same project

Found your problem bro. No idea how you managed to bring those two together, but I'm willing to bet you are just throwing buzzwords together in a shitty attempt to troll. Well played.

Re:RUN FOR YOUR LIVES (1, Insightful)

Richard_at_work (517087) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862783)

Sounds like you are doing it wrong then, because there's a whole ecosystem of .Net developers out there who seem to get things done just fine...

Re:RUN FOR YOUR LIVES (0)

SageMusings (463344) | more than 2 years ago | (#39863089)

Except we cannot make 1.7 oz burgers like those PHP studs are capable of crafting.

Re:RUN FOR YOUR LIVES (1)

PRMan (959735) | more than 2 years ago | (#39863001)

MVC makes things way faster and so does LINQ when used judiciously. WPF/XAML does make things difficult at times.

Re:RUN FOR YOUR LIVES (1)

gbjbaanb (229885) | more than 2 years ago | (#39863059)

you think that's bad... the current design pattern du jour for WPF is the MVVM pattern - that's Model, View, Viewmodel. (like they couldn't even come up with a good name... model, view. umm, err. I know! ViewModel!)

You know you got problems when the creator of the pattern says that the overhead involved is too great for simple projects, and the complexity is too great for large projects, and in any case you have to be really careful or you end up using massive amounts of memory in the middle bit.

So, its no good for small, large or intermediate projects then... This is Microsoft's state of the art folks and it's currently the only pattern worth knowing if you're going for a WPF/C# job. It amazes me that so many people blindly follow whatever hype comes out of Redmond sometimes.

Re:RUN FOR YOUR LIVES (0)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | about 2 years ago | (#39863159)

Pshaw, you're still using MVVM? All the cool kids already switched to Model, View, ViewModel and ViewModelMetaData (MVVMVMMD, or MV3) [microsoft.com]

Re:RUN FOR YOUR LIVES (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39863341)

That's why I avoid MSDN magazine like the plague. It's full of somewhat interesting concepts with no practical use in a LOB application. Lightswitch is as much a development platform as Access is a database.

Re:RUN FOR YOUR LIVES (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39863299)

That's because MVC is garbage.

double threat = safety (1)

rst123 (2440064) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862629)

game plan: Oracle's copyright lawyers fight Microsoft's patent lawyers over who gets to destroy them first. lawyers kill each other and the whole world wins?

WAITING FOR MONO FOR WINDOWS PHONE MYSELF !! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39862651)

Then, when that happens, I can do anything anywhere and everywhere, and not just run, either !!

Next wish: GoSub for Forth !! Now we be cookin !!

Unimpressed (2)

diegocg (1680514) | more than 2 years ago | (#39862701)

It seems like they are "translating" the Java code to C#, then compiling it with Mono. I had expected support for running Android bytecode, or something like that...

Re:Unimpressed (0)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 2 years ago | (#39863113)

It seems like they are "translating" the Java code to C#, then compiling it with Mono.

Yes, that is what "ported to C#" means.

COBOL port (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39862943)

I'm waiting for the COBOL port...

Re:COBOL port (1)

SQLGuru (980662) | about 2 years ago | (#39863241)

No machine has enough RAM to hold the source code.....it's too wordy.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>