Printable View
One of these guys from Microsoft said here that portions of .NET Framework and runtime was developed using VB.NET. Does it mean .NET Framework 3.5 was developed in VB.NET 2003 or VB 2005 using older versions of the Framework? In which language was .NET Framework 1.0/1.1 written?
Thread Moved from Chit Chat which is for non-technical topics.
Post #11 states what parts are developed with what technology.
http://www.vbforums.com/showthread.php?t=500578
Is that the post you were referring to ?
Yeah.Quote:
Originally Posted by RobDog888
So the answer would be yes, part of the framework is written in vb.net as well as parts of the IDEQuote:
VB runtime is completely written in VB (hence so is part of the .NET framework redist)
Wait so does that mean part of the .net framework is actually .net bytecode being interrupted Just-In-Time by the .net framework?Quote:
Originally Posted by RobDog888
How can a the framework be interpretting itself?
Not sure but Paul's (Microsoft) quote is where I took it from out of the thread linked previously.
My guess would be that the redistributable part of the quote may be an indicator of which part.
I personally think everything in .NET 1.1 (VS, Framework etc) was developed with VC++ 6. From then on, next version of .NET was developed with previous version of VC++ .NET (i.e. .NET 2.0 was developed with VC++ .NET 2003). Microsoft would never trust VB (or even C#!) with something as important as the .NET technologies. Only C++ is upto the job.
Note: This is a personal view only.
They wouldnt have used VC++ but rather just C++
A large portion of the .NET framework is written in C#. A few of the base classes were written in C++ and so is the Common Language Interpreter. From then on it's just a matter of building layers upon layers to provide you with new functionality.
But I think the point trying to be made/understood is how can it be written with .net when it requires .net to start with. Kind of like a circular reference issue.