Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Microsoft Open-Sources .NET Compiler Platform

posted by Dopefish on Friday April 04 2014, @06:50AM   Printer-friendly
from the good-will-goes-far dept.

prospectacle writes:

If Microsoft can't beat free programming languages, it appears willing to join them, as it open sources its .NET compiler for C# and Visual Basic, under the Apache 2.0 license.

The "Roslyn" compiler platform also contains code-analysis APIs that could be useful if you were trying to make, for example, code-completion or syntax-checking features in your own code-editor.

To manage this and other recently liberated projects, the .NET foundation has been launched, including "community leaders such as Miguel de Icaza (Xamarin), Laurent Bugnion (IdentityMine), Niels Hartvig (Umbraco), Nigel Sampson (Compiled Experience), Anthony van der Hoorn (Glimpse) and Paul Betts."

The inevitable victory of free and open-source as the dominant model of software development is drawing closer than ever before.

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Microsoft Open-Sources .NET Compiler Platform | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 23 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 05 2014, @06:52AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 05 2014, @06:52AM (#26570)

    So we're devolving into /. group-think already?
    THAT was certainly quick!

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 05 2014, @08:07PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 05 2014, @08:07PM (#26807)

    While you appear to have defended his position, what you didn't do was rebut my assertion.
    ...nor did you add a data set that would serve to validate his unsupported claim.

    I like GPL-like licenses, which do NOT allow Free Software be turned into closed, proprietary code, and he likes the sort of "permissive" license that allows open code to be made closed.
    I'm clearly against EULAware and he is clearly against mandated inheritable code freedom.
    Those are polar opposite positions. There isn't a way to reconcile them. Deal with it.

    -- gewg_

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 05 2014, @10:38PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 05 2014, @10:38PM (#26853)

      Your paranoid ad-hominem was not only false (and paranoid), but not worth rebutting.

      His critique was that companies are funding projects that under-cut the GNU movement. Your critique was moonbat-crazy bullshit: advantage -him.

      Get a brain -or at least loosen the tinfoil hat on your current one, get some reading comprehension and then you come on back again.

      Or don't. If SN is simply going to indulge in the same /.-style groupthink, where any critique of the FOSS movement is considered anathema, you'll probably be talking to yourself, anyway (we've already got one slashdot).

      --posting anon because I've seen this movie already...fifteen years ago...and like most remakes, it's pretty crap.