coreclr

Has anyone tested this project on NetBSD. https://github.com/dotnet/coreclr/pull/4504/files Any reason why it would not work.

Technically the restrictions already exist, just as a part of the development experience. - .NET Hot Reload is only implemented on Windows. It requires support in the .NET runtime, which is technically possible to implement, but the team has not gotten around to implementing it for years. This doesn't have to do with the issue around MS removing the "dotnet watch" command, it's for the "Edit and Continue" feature in IDEs.[1][2] - MS was considering deprecating Omnisharp, the open-source language server that implements C# support for VS Code, and replacing it with a closed-source version. Since the announcement, commits to omnisharp-vscode have dropped off significantly. The lack of Omnisharp would mean there would be no real open-source C# development environment for Linux anymore, since MonoDevelop was abandoned a few years ago.[3] [1] h

Use perfcollect for Linux: https://github.com/dotnet/coreclr/blob/master/Documentation/... Since that is adapted to use Linux specifics :)

I wasn't following React during that kerfuffle. Reading about it, it seems to be that Facebook made an Apache style licence with a very titled patent clause, where one's rights are terminated following any patent suit against Facebook, even if the patent suit did not relate to React. That is, the problem seems to be the phrasing of the patent clause which was included in the licence, and a different patent promise would not be a problem. The phrasing of the .NET patent promise[0] doesn't seem to have that problem. It might be a bit difficult for people who want to copy and modify the code, since the promise is limited there (only reimplemtations, but I can understand that since they don't want to waive the patents altogether). However, the promise seems fine for users of the framework (IANAL etc. etc.). [0] https://github.com/dotnet/core

It appears that the .NET Core CLR does perform some rudimentary escape analysis: https://github.com/dotnet/coreclr/pull/6653

>She's actually rejected community pull requests to break it up Did she? The original pull request to split up that source file was closed by someone else with summary justification: https://github.com/dotnet/coreclr/pull/403 I think you're oversimplifying the problem here, which may be in great part institutional.

This. Modern C# in net-core 3 can even match C++ at manually vectorized numeric code: https://github.com/dotnet/coreclr/issues/27909#issuecomment-...

Interesting. In .NET Core 2.1, they decided just 30 calls was enough to recompile from the fast “tier 0” JIT code to the fully optimized “tier 1” JITed code. https://github.com/dotnet/coreclr/blob/master/Documentation/...

I'm not sure if that is still true for .net core 3 Edit: Looks like it still is not done: https://github.com/dotnet/coreclr/issues/20486

Windows programmers are familiar with StrSafe.h, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strsafe.h and https://github.com/dotnet/coreclr/blob/master/src/pal/inc/st... which go a lot further. Also found https://github.com/mubix/netview/blob/master/banned.h on Github with a better list.

Well, .NET GC was originally implemented in Lisp. https://github.com/dotnet/coreclr/issues/401 And NeXTSTEP Interface Builder prototype was done in Common Lisp https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interface_Builder https://vimeo.com/62618532 So it definitly had an influence on iOS and Windows. Regarding Android, as Guy Steele puts it on his ClojureTV talk about Java. "We were not out to win over the Lisp programmers; we were after the C++ programmers. We managed to drag a lot of them about halfway to Lisp." Finally, regarding the Web https://thenewstack.io/brendan-eich-on-creating-javascript-i... "He later calls Scheme “that beautiful research language I was tempted with.” But by the time he’d joined Netscape, they had a deal with Sun Microsystems, which was now pushing their newly-minted language Java. “And suddenly the story was, ‘Well, we don

Waiting it to be ported to BSD systems[1][2][3]. [1] https://github.com/dotnet/coreclr/labels/os-freebsd [2] https://github.com/dotnet/corefx/labels/os-freebsd [3] https://github.com/dotnet/corefx/labels/os-netbsd

> because certain types of silly mistakes I tend to make in Python and C just wouldn't compile. Python and C are similar in that regard. You can compile almost anything in them. Will then crash in runtime if not OK, gracefully for Python, the whole process for C. Languages like Java or C# are different. Both are strongly typed, a lot of things are checked by compilers. I believe C# is safer than Rust because native code surface is much smaller. Safe Rust is fundamentally limited by that borrow checker. Read the source of Rust standard library, you'll see tons of unsafe code everywhere. Rust developers probably did a good job verifying their implementations of stuff like Vec and HashMap, but there're less used parts of the standard library. Non-standard third-party libraries also using unsafe. .NET doesn't need any unsafe code for such thi

Yeah, I think this is the relevant bit: https://github.com/dotnet/coreclr/blob/master/Documentation/... Seems like they started trying speculative optimizations about six months ago. Speculative optimizations are not only the foundation of Graal but also of C2, BTW.