Mono's WinForms 2.0 Implementation Completed 164
adrian.henke writes "After four years of development, 115K lines of source code, and 6,434 commits, Jonathan Pobst announces that Mono's WinForms 2.0 implementation is now complete. This announcement has been long awaited by any .NET WinForms developer who has ever tried to get an applications to work on Linux using Mono."
But can I actually use it for anything? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:too little, too late? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:too little, too late? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:This will be a big help (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:too little, too late? (Score:4, Insightful)
Personally I'd rather work directly in Python/Ruby on GTK/Qt than go through an extra layer that is
And while Mono's not horrible, but it's not nearly as fast as the Sun JVM, so if I want fast bytecode I'd rather use Java than C#.
Re:But why the Win32 style in WinForms? (Score:4, Insightful)
If you don't want to be compatible with Win32, use GTK#.
Re:too little, too late? (Score:5, Insightful)
Java is fast? Go try to run Azureus and weep.
Oh, you do? And you think it is fast? Try utorrent on Windows or Transmission on OSX or KTorrent on Linux some time.
People can write slow programs in any language. The question is, can moderately competent programmers write fast, efficient, maintainable programs in them? Pointing to one example is pointless. Back on topic, a quick check on Alioth [debian.org] will show you that overall, Java is faster than C#/Mono but uses more memory (although on some benchmarks the opposite is the case). It's also worth pointing out that although Java is not faster than C++ on any benchmark, it's substantially slower on only three. In general the performance of a program has much more to do with good design and good algorithms than it has to do with choice of language.
Re:Would be awesome... (Score:3, Insightful)