I think you're under the incorrect belief that this compile of Quake resulted in just normal native code. No the result of the recompile with the /clr option was MSIL (similar in some ways to Java bytecode). You can run ILDASM on the .exe to look at the MSIL
Ah, I misunderstood. I thought it was compiled to native code but was ".net aware" and could make calls out of MSIL code. Knowing that it's actually compiled directly to MSIL is very cool. But doesn't that mean that any proprietary algorithms are pretty exposed
in the MSIL?
Also, this doesn't mean that the original C++ code, even when it's compiled to MSIL, is managed it just means that it can make calls to other MSIL code right? The original C++ code is "unsafe" and is not under the control of the GC?
What if I could take Doom3... the original code, throw the /jvm switch and now it was running on the JVM at 90% of the native code speed. And then I added some Java control to the game -- all easily. Now wouldn't you agree that this would be big news? Well
that's what you just saw with .NET.
Kang Su Gatlin
Visual C++ Program Manager
Yeah, this was big news a year or so ago. I'm more excited by the managed DirectX demos that I see coming out with the SDK and from third parties.
I remember looking at that and I was amazed that managed code could run that fast.
I don't think this is managed code, I think he said this is compiled with the /clr switch. Which means it can make calls to MSIL code, not that it's own objects are under control of the GC. I'm no C++ guru though, so take my comment with the appropriate
salt lick block.
That being said, the next versions ability to put any C++ type under GC controls using the GC new sounds very cool.
Given how far along ObjectSpaces was/is(?), I wonder if there was any discussion about decoupling it from WinFS and releasing it along with Avalon/Indigo in XP: The empire strikes back? Maybe in a less ambitious form.
If you like MS-Build, why wait for MS to get around to releasing it? Why not use
NAnt right now?
Went with the BuildManager tool from the MS Patterns and Practises site. Does NAnt help with assembly dependencies? When I skimmed through the documentation I didn't see any mention. Would be interested to hear what it does.
Can someone post a link to the BuildManager tool at the MS Patterns and Practices site. I can't find it anywhere on that site and the search, predictably, doesn't help.
I was thinking of getting in touch w/ Paul Murphy and seeing about setting up a "downtown Seattle" geek dinner while
Adam Field is staying at the Westin.
But, the reason I didn't link to your blog is cause I didn't know about it.
Yeah, trackbacks suck as a method for linking blogs together mainly because they are unreliable or they depend on someone being able to see the link in their referral log. I tracked back every post you linked to above and my trackback only showed up in 1/2
of them. My trackback to your blog was probably lost in the glut of trackback from A-list bloggers. errrr.... I mean it's obviously the intent of the MS PR machine to inhibit any dissenting voices by not linking to them. (whew, almost lost my paranoia there
for a second)
My original post was written in the comments to a post that Robert Scoble made about
popular Longhorn myths. Then, Sam Druker responded to some of the comments.
If you really want answers on more specific questions go the the channel9 forums and ask (easier for me if they are all consolidated). I'm not interested in responding to trolls or debating marketing hype. If you have questions about what WinFS
is, can do, how application developers or users should adopt the storage platform or other technical questions, I'm game. Here's the video forums link:
So I came here and asked the same question. Which went unanswered in both places. So I made a "bump" post to get it back into view of everyone reading here and figured the best way to get someone to respond here would be to make it into a negative post. It
worked! Thanks for responding to negativity.
(btw I joined before you and I've posted 23 more times than you WTF does that have to do with my arguments?)
Web Fountain deals more with HOW we can search the data and how we aggregate the searches
using natural language rather than dealing with how the data is stored. But they are developing it to deal with text data, both structured and unstructured. What does that have to do with WinFS? Imagine being able to type a letter to your family about a
recent vacation and have an application that parses through your letter and inserts the appropriate vacation pictures in the correct spots. e.g. You talk about how Uncle Bob fell off his chair and the system searches your vacation images for "Uncle Bob fell
off his chair" and finds the image with the metadata "Uncle Bob falls chair" attached to it.
OFS does have more similarities to WinFS, but it is enterprise oriented. There are TONS of document management systems out there for every platform. If you think WinFS will remain a desktop technology, I'd think you're mistaken. I believe the post-WinFS versions
of SQL server and Exchange will be based on WinFS. Meaning a WinFS search will not only search your files, but also databases and your email. It has always been feasable to include a DB file system in desktop systems. The BeOS system had one years ago. The
fact that Microsoft is coming out with one in six years doesn't mean that it's just NOW possible, it just means that Microsoft is making it a priority for their operating system.
There are tons of desktop oriented file searching applications. What I'm interested in is how WinFS compares to OFS and Web Fountain. What the differences and similiarities are. Why should I care. If I'm picking an Enterprise database file system (in six or
more years) why should I chose a WinFS based system over OFS?