On Tuesday, 20 August 2013 at 07:45:28 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
With the failure that Longhorn and Vista were, the .NET
political camp inside Microsoft lost power to the native guys.
I bet this is what was behind the WinRT decision, because the
original .NET design documents for .NET were actually based in
COM as well.
Interesting!
Even if Microsoft decides to go fully native, then just have to
change the C#/VB.NET/F# compilers to generate fully native
binaries instead of MSIL.
.NET is just a language runtime. Developers should not confuse
languages with implementations.
I don't quite agree with this. Imagine if I said "they just have
to change their Javascript compilers to produce native code".
It's clear that the semantics of the JS language do not map well
enough to the x86 semantics for us to consider the produced x86
code to be "fully native". It would be x86 code, but you wouldn't
be able to do systems programming, like in C++ or D. To a lesser
extent the same is true with, say, C#. The design of the language
makes it less native to a x86 CPU than C++.
