| Groups | Blog | Home |
dotnet faqs : Is there a .NET or C# to native x86 compiler?
Is there a .NET or C# to native x86 compiler? I am not looking for just a
prejitter progrom like ngen, but a true native compiler like the gcc for java if there is such a thing. Thanks Andy
Please don't crosspost.
No, there isn't any way to compile to native code. There is a third-party production from RemoteSoft that reduces the size of the installation (giving it the appearance of a traditional .exe), but I haven't tried it. http://www.remotesoft.com/linker/ [quoted text, click to view] "Andy Chau" <wunchun@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:%23%23tiR7SsDHA.2448@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl... > Is there a .NET or C# to native x86 compiler? I am not looking for just a > prejitter progrom like ngen, but a true native compiler like the gcc for > java if there is such a thing. > > > > Thanks > > Andy > >
Nice link. The prices seem high, but the tools look very interesting.
[quoted text, click to view] "Robert Jacobson" <rjacobson_at_oddpost_com@nospam.com> wrote in message news:uJYW7oTsDHA.2436@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl... > Please don't crosspost. > > No, there isn't any way to compile to native code. There is a third-party > production from RemoteSoft that reduces the size of the installation (giving > it the appearance of a traditional .exe), but I haven't tried it. > > http://www.remotesoft.com/linker/ > > > "Andy Chau" <wunchun@hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:%23%23tiR7SsDHA.2448@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl... > > Is there a .NET or C# to native x86 compiler? I am not looking for just a > > prejitter progrom like ngen, but a true native compiler like the gcc for > > java if there is such a thing. > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > Andy > > > > > >
[quoted text, click to view] "Robert Jacobson" <rjacobson_at_oddpost_com@nospam.com> wrote in message We are working on a .NET Native compiler. It will be part of LSW DotNet-Labnews:uJYW7oTsDHA.2436@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl... > Please don't crosspost. > > No, there isn't any way to compile to native code. There is a third-party > production from RemoteSoft that reduces the size of the installation (giving > it the appearance of a traditional .exe), but I haven't tried it. > > http://www.remotesoft.com/linker/ > > > "Andy Chau" <wunchun@hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:%23%23tiR7SsDHA.2448@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl... > > Is there a .NET or C# to native x86 compiler? I am not looking for just a > > prejitter progrom like ngen, but a true native compiler like the gcc for > > java if there is such a thing. > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > Andy > > > > > > 2.0 ( www.lesser-software.com/lswdnl.htm ) Currently we are working on the 1.0 Final release which will contain our Reflection-Browser, Decompiler, Assembly Editor, our new Obfuscator with Control-Flow Obfuscation & our UML Diagrammer. We estimate spring 2004 for a prerelease of 2.0 .. with best regards, Frank Lesser, www.lesser-software.com
No, but there is a way to native compile .NET: Remote Soft's Salamander .NET
Native Compiler (www.remotesoft.com). NOTE: I have not tested the tool yet, so I do not know how well it lives up to its promise. -- Gregory A. Beamer MVP; MCP: +I, SE, SD, DBA ********************************************************************** Think Outside the Box! ********************************************************************** [quoted text, click to view] "Andy Chau" <wunchun@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:%23%23tiR7SsDHA.2448@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl... > Is there a .NET or C# to native x86 compiler? I am not looking for just a > prejitter progrom like ngen, but a true native compiler like the gcc for > java if there is such a thing. > > > > Thanks > > Andy > >
That's the same product I suggested. According to the site, it doesn't
actually compile to native code -- it just extracts the necessary portions of the .Net Framework so you don't have to deploy the entire Framework Redistributable. It looks like a true native compilation feature might be on Salamander's "to do" list. "Cowboy (Gregory A. Beamer)" <NoSpamMgbworld@comcast.netNoSpamM> wrote in message news:OF6LekEuDHA.2544@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl... [quoted text, click to view] > No, but there is a way to native compile .NET: Remote Soft's Salamander ..NET > Native Compiler (www.remotesoft.com). NOTE: I have not tested the tool yet, > so I do not know how well it lives up to its promise. > > -- > Gregory A. Beamer > MVP; MCP: +I, SE, SD, DBA > > ********************************************************************** > Think Outside the Box! > ********************************************************************** > "Andy Chau" <wunchun@hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:%23%23tiR7SsDHA.2448@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl... > > Is there a .NET or C# to native x86 compiler? I am not looking for just a > > prejitter progrom like ngen, but a true native compiler like the gcc for > > java if there is such a thing. > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > Andy > > > > > >
[quoted text, click to view]
> actually compile to native code -- it just extracts the necessary portions > of the .Net Framework so you don't have to deploy the entire Framework Doesn't that violate the redist license? -mike MVP [quoted text, click to view] > > "Cowboy (Gregory A. Beamer)" <NoSpamMgbworld@comcast.netNoSpamM> wrote in > message news:OF6LekEuDHA.2544@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl... > > No, but there is a way to native compile .NET: Remote Soft's Salamander > .NET > > Native Compiler (www.remotesoft.com). NOTE: I have not tested the tool > yet, > > so I do not know how well it lives up to its promise. > > > > -- > > Gregory A. Beamer > > MVP; MCP: +I, SE, SD, DBA > > > > ********************************************************************** > > Think Outside the Box! > > ********************************************************************** > > "Andy Chau" <wunchun@hotmail.com> wrote in message > > news:%23%23tiR7SsDHA.2448@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl... > > > Is there a .NET or C# to native x86 compiler? I am not looking for just > a > > > prejitter progrom like ngen, but a true native compiler like the gcc for > > > java if there is such a thing. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > > > > > > >
Lets hope not, that thing looks like a super handy tool. If the framework
was more like 1-2MB instead of 20+ it would not be an issue. Is there any way to get clarification on this issue from MS? I was thinking of purchasing this product, but not until I get the all clear about that redist license issue. Michael [quoted text, click to view] "Michael Giagnocavo [MVP]" <mggUNSPAM@Atrevido.net> wrote in message news:OCidtzSuDHA.1088@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl... > > actually compile to native code -- it just extracts the necessary portions > > of the .Net Framework so you don't have to deploy the entire Framework > > Doesn't that violate the redist license? > -mike > MVP > > > > > "Cowboy (Gregory A. Beamer)" <NoSpamMgbworld@comcast.netNoSpamM> wrote in > > message news:OF6LekEuDHA.2544@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl... > > > No, but there is a way to native compile .NET: Remote Soft's Salamander > > .NET > > > Native Compiler (www.remotesoft.com). NOTE: I have not tested the tool > > yet, > > > so I do not know how well it lives up to its promise. > > > > > > -- > > > Gregory A. Beamer > > > MVP; MCP: +I, SE, SD, DBA > > > > > > ********************************************************************** > > > Think Outside the Box! > > > ********************************************************************** > > > "Andy Chau" <wunchun@hotmail.com> wrote in message > > > news:%23%23tiR7SsDHA.2448@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl... > > > > Is there a .NET or C# to native x86 compiler? I am not looking for > just > > a > > > > prejitter progrom like ngen, but a true native compiler like the gcc > for > > > > java if there is such a thing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.544 / Virus Database: 338 - Release Date: 11/25/2003
Probably.... along with any number of Microsoft copyrights. Plus it just
sounds like bad voodoo. <g> I'd think twice before using this with a shipping commercial app. [quoted text, click to view] "Michael Giagnocavo [MVP]" <mggUNSPAM@Atrevido.net> wrote in message news:OCidtzSuDHA.1088@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl... > > actually compile to native code -- it just extracts the necessary portions > > of the .Net Framework so you don't have to deploy the entire Framework > > Doesn't that violate the redist license? > -mike > MVP > > > > > "Cowboy (Gregory A. Beamer)" <NoSpamMgbworld@comcast.netNoSpamM> wrote in > > message news:OF6LekEuDHA.2544@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl... > > > No, but there is a way to native compile .NET: Remote Soft's Salamander > > .NET > > > Native Compiler (www.remotesoft.com). NOTE: I have not tested the tool > > yet, > > > so I do not know how well it lives up to its promise. > > > > > > -- > > > Gregory A. Beamer > > > MVP; MCP: +I, SE, SD, DBA > > > > > > ********************************************************************** > > > Think Outside the Box! > > > ********************************************************************** > > > "Andy Chau" <wunchun@hotmail.com> wrote in message > > > news:%23%23tiR7SsDHA.2448@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl... > > > > Is there a .NET or C# to native x86 compiler? I am not looking for > just > > a > > > > prejitter progrom like ngen, but a true native compiler like the gcc > for > > > > java if there is such a thing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > Andy > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
[quoted text, click to view]
Frank Lesser [LSW] wrote: > We are working on a .NET Native compiler. It will be part of LSW > DotNet-Lab > 2.0 ( www.lesser-software.com/lswdnl.htm ) I can understand a C# to native compiler, but a ".NET Native compiler" does not make sense. Can you explain what benefit there is in using it? In my opinion, if your product does not have code access security, automatic bounds checking, assembly verifiablitiy and validation then it is not safe to use. If it does not support a sizable subsection of the framework library then it is not particularly useful. If you have provided all of the security and a good chunk of the library then I would imagine that you would have nearly the bulk of the Microsoft .NET framework (which is free), in which case I don't see what benefit there is in purchasing another tool. Am I missing something? Richard -- my email evpuneqt@zicf.bet is encrypted with ROT13 (www.rot13.org)
[quoted text, click to view] "Richard Grimes [MVP]" <read my sig> wrote in message news:ODovw7KyDHA.2464@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl... > Frank Lesser [LSW] wrote: > > We are working on a .NET Native compiler. It will be part of LSW > > DotNet-Lab > > 2.0 ( www.lesser-software.com/lswdnl.htm ) > > I can understand a C# to native compiler, but a ".NET Native compiler" does > not make sense. Can you explain what benefit there is in using it? > > In my opinion, if your product does not have code access security, automatic > bounds checking, assembly verifiablitiy and validation then it is not safe > to use. If it does not support a sizable subsection of the framework library > then it is not particularly useful. If you have provided all of the security > and a good chunk of the library then I would imagine that you would have > nearly the bulk of the Microsoft .NET framework (which is free), in which > case I don't see what benefit there is in purchasing another tool. > > Am I missing something? > > Richard > -- > my email evpuneqt@zicf.bet is encrypted with ROT13 (www.rot13.org) > > Hi, most .NET apps use only a fraction of the framework. We know the topic very well from deploying Smalltalk apps - where you have image sizes comparable to the framework size ( Our current Smalltalk Development Image is 60-80 MB big - The LSW DotNet-Lab Binary is aprox 4 MB ) Of course if your imaginary app uses every corner of the framework you will end up with an exe which is as big as the original framework. The current modularization of the framework doesn't allow to extract the code really needed in an easy way - it is main part of our work adding such a modularization concept. Frank
Microsoft should come up with a .NET runtime assembler which can assemble
the required runtime installation for an application - after verifying an application. This may make the deployment easier ;). lol. After all, have a look at the Mono run time - a free implementation of .NET for linux. - http://www.go-mono.com Regs, Anoop [quoted text, click to view] "Frank Lesser [LSW]" <Frank-Lesser@lesser-software.com> wrote in message news:uHo#mCPyDHA.2440@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl... > > "Richard Grimes [MVP]" <read my sig> wrote in message > news:ODovw7KyDHA.2464@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl... > > Frank Lesser [LSW] wrote: > > > We are working on a .NET Native compiler. It will be part of LSW > > > DotNet-Lab > > > 2.0 ( www.lesser-software.com/lswdnl.htm ) > > > > I can understand a C# to native compiler, but a ".NET Native compiler" > does > > not make sense. Can you explain what benefit there is in using it? > > > > In my opinion, if your product does not have code access security, > automatic > > bounds checking, assembly verifiablitiy and validation then it is not safe > > to use. If it does not support a sizable subsection of the framework > library > > then it is not particularly useful. If you have provided all of the > security > > and a good chunk of the library then I would imagine that you would have > > nearly the bulk of the Microsoft .NET framework (which is free), in which > > case I don't see what benefit there is in purchasing another tool. > > > > Am I missing something? > > > > Richard > > -- > > my email evpuneqt@zicf.bet is encrypted with ROT13 (www.rot13.org) > > > > > > Hi, > most .NET apps use only a fraction of the framework. We know the topic very > well from deploying Smalltalk apps - where you have image sizes comparable > to the framework size ( Our current Smalltalk Development Image is 60-80 MB > big - The LSW DotNet-Lab Binary is aprox 4 MB ) > Of course if your imaginary app uses every corner of the framework you will > end up with an exe which is as big as the original framework. The current > modularization of the framework doesn't allow to extract the code really > needed in an easy way - it is main part of our work adding such a > modularization concept. > Frank > > > > > >
Don't see what you're looking for? Try a search.
|
June 2003
July 2003
August 2003
September 2003
October 2003
November 2003
December 2003
January 2004
February 2004
March 2004
April 2004
May 2004
June 2004
July 2004
August 2004
September 2004
October 2004
November 2004
December 2004
January 2005
February 2005
March 2005
April 2005
May 2005
June 2005
July 2005
August 2005
September 2005
October 2005
November 2005
December 2005
January 2006
February 2006
March 2006
April 2006
May 2006
June 2006
July 2006
August 2006
September 2006
October 2006
November 2006
December 2006
January 2007
February 2007
March 2007
April 2007
May 2007
June 2007
July 2007
August 2007
September 2007
October 2007
November 2007
December 2007
January 2008
February 2008
March 2008
April 2008
May 2008
June 2008
| home · blog · groups | Questions? Comments? Contact the dn |