Microsoft/Novell Partnership

[Lennart Sorensen]

On Fri, Nov 03, 2006 at 11:10:02AM -0500, ted leslie wrote:
> With quad cores being norm in 1 year and 8-core maybe in 2?,
> and such a pathetic use of this technology by all involved,
> the extra cores will take a CLI system and make it perform 
> better then most things that are not under active development.
> If we were still in a single core world, i'd agree,
> but since (with cell, amd dual/quad core), its just simply not
> going to happen. The days of efficient languages on a single core, even
> down to assembly are coming to a quick end. The extra 3 cores that are
> just sitting there idle, will be able to optimize and cache the 
> CLI to a efficient form. For calls to do shading , poly draw, etc,
> those are going to be C/asm , and mostly in the card HW anyways.
> CLI on 8 cores is plenty to get whatever game your going to need.

Just because we have more resources doesn't mean we should simply waste
more of them.  And of course many people do write code for low power
embedded systems, where you are lucky to have 64MB ram, and a 200MHz
processor.  Many are a lot smaller than that.

> And in time C# will compile down to what C does anyways (down to native
> compiler) , so as far as parking your "programming time" in front of one
> language/platform, Mono still (will) have everything C will have
> anyways. So you just get the best of everything in one place. all be it
> if you choose to use C# native comp'd you will not get x-platfrom
> independance. but atleast a recompile will be relatively easy on the
> other platform.

And the runtime will be shrunk how?  Many modern languages have too much
baggage attached.

--
Len Sorensen
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists