Coffeehouse Thread

13 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

Why is the J# runtime always installing with VS 2005?

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    littleguru

    Why is the J# runtime always installing with VS 2005? Ther is no checkbox to disable that.

    I don't want it to be installed!

    What part of VS or what program is using that runtime? It is so weird.

  • User profile image
    Manip

    What's the big deal here?

    And obviously the VS 2005 UI is using the framework.

  • User profile image
    littleguru

    Well I just don't want it... Which parts of the UI are using it... I mean the C# runtime something does not need to be installed. I thought also parts of VS are written in C#.

    Why is there a runtime for that thing anyway? I thought it is a .NET language. There is also no extra VB.NET runtime or extra C# runtime.

  • User profile image
    Manip

    Uhh the J# language tools might be using the J# framework?

    ... Also did you consider that the J# framework is larger than the VB.net framework? And that it has to support lots of Java centric bits?

    Microsoft no doubt decided to leave J# out of the .net framework to stop people using it to widely. It is only designed to allow people to port their projects over, and if they are going to go to the trouble and expense of porting then they can also go to the trouble of installing the additional framework.

    The .Net framework contains what could have equally been stand alone C# and VB.net frameworks. Not to mention the Managed VC++ framework.

    I just really don't see the issue here.

  • User profile image
    littleguru

    OK. I understand. They decided to put it in another extra package. Smiley Well that makes sense if the thing is really such big. I have not used J# yet.

    Well this thread is only because I was wondering since quite a time, why this thing is installed.

    It was already in VS.NET for .NET 1.0 and .NET 1.1 that the runtime had been installed and I thought before VS2005 Visual Studio was totally free of managed code.

    Just wondering Smiley

  • User profile image
    littleguru

    Well I always thought J# is part of .NET!?

  • User profile image
    Sven Groot

    littleguru wrote:
    Well I always thought J# is part of .NET!?

    It is sorta. But J# also provides a whole bunch of libraries that resemble the Java class libraries to provide source compatibility with Java code. It's those class libraries that are not part of the core .Net redistributable, but that are in the J# redistributable.

    I would also prefer it if VS didn't require the J# redistributable when J# is not installed, in fact I even requested this in the product feedback center during the beta, but unfortunately they didn't do it.

  • User profile image
    Flip

    I believe I can understand the original poster's sentiments.  I too would like to NOT install anything java related.

    My reasons are person, and irrelevant to this discussion IMHO.  I second the question, how do you not install the J# framekwork?  I mean if VB is part of the .NET framework and I can choose not to install that, why can't I do the same for J#?  If I'm not mistaken the framework includes many options in the Control Panel installed programs (runtime, installer, etc I believe).

    The crux of this posting/question/issue, IMHO, is the ability to focus purely on C#, or any other languae of choice.  I realize I could install VB, C++ and J#, but if I'm only doing C# dev, I would like to limit what I see (and occupy on my HD) to just C# tools.

    What I'm seeing now is a mix of C# and J# tools when all I want is C#.  I assume this is also true for any VB.NET people too?

  • User profile image
    Manip

    I can imagine the J# being a framework being a problem on your 250MB of internal storage... I mean it is using up almost 5% of your drive!!!!! 8-)

  • User profile image
    Flip

    re 5% of the drive
    It's not the small % of the drive that concerns me, just that it's the space that will never be used/looked at/accessed at all.  Kind of like installing a foreign dictionary for Word, no sense having something on there I know I'll never use.  Likewise when doing the Office install at home, I just opt out of the Access and PowerPoint installs, same logic, no sense installing stuff that just takes up valuable HD.

    I guess this comes down to two issues.  One is the HD MBs and one is the actual opting out of the intall.  Albeit the first one is trivial, it's not the focus of the question, IMHO.  The latter one is the kicker, at least for me it is.  MS does a great job of letting me not install VB and C++, why can't it let me do that for J# too?

    Thanks.

  • User profile image
    Manip

    Maybe Microsoft shouldn't have listed it at all and just installed it as a 'common' conponent... At least then it would stop the bitching and complaining.

  • User profile image
    littleguru

    Well if everybody installs that and that and nobody knows why, then the thing becomes weird. You know: I'm just pointing out the 100000 technologies that are installed when trying to install one thing.

    I understand that VS is a complex space, but it is not required to make it so complex. Keep it simple.

    Immagine you install VS + Team System! You get crazy. I installed 3 times the TS CTPs (I mean three different) ... The first was impossible to have it running. It is such a challange to have all technologies set up exactly like the program needs them.

    Things get to complex. Complexity should rest in the program and not on the user end...

    The most weird thing that I ever installed is Oracle on a WinXP SP2 computer... I have never seen something like that... It stopped the Windows Firewall, I was unable to establish a network connection, perl was running, java, some c/c++ helper dll, the .NET runtime installed and some parts are written in lisp...

  • User profile image
    littleguru

    Btw: what does Java in the VS? Wink

    I'm just trying to understand... I'm not saying VS is poor/bad or not good enough - I like VS very very much (especially after having done stuff on Eclipse)!

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.