Bug#416996: ITP: stereo -- Mono (.NET) extension for running multiple applications
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Erich Schubert <erich@debian.org>
* Package name : stereo
Version : 2.0 beta
* URL : http://www.mono-project.com/Stereo
* License : LGPL
Programming Lang: C#
Description : Mono (.NET) extension for running multiple applications
Stereo is an extension to the Mono (.NET/C#) platform for running
multiple applications at the same time.
As you probably know, C# is a language using a bytecode, called CIL:
Common Intermediate Language. Using code in an intermediate language has
benefits for platform and operating system independence (Java is the
most prominent example of this approach), however it also means an
overhead when running the applications. Various approaches have been
tried to remedy these effects, such as JIT (just in time) compilers
translating the bytecode to native code when needed.
Applications running based on such bytecodes tend to use more memory
than regular applications (for example, they need to keep the compiled
code in writeable memory, whereas regular applications can use shared
read-only memory for this), and you probably have heard many people
complain about the memory usage of Java and .Net applications. Some
people even claim the Linux .NET platform is called "Mono" because you
can run at most one such application at the same time.
That how "stereo" was born: an extensions to run two (or more)
applications in the same mono environment, thus reducing the memory
overhead significantly, and making it useful for more people.
Future versions should even be able to run Python (using IronPython) and
eventually Java applications in the stereo runtime. It is also planned to
add support for multiple user operation. So eventually, it will be able
to replace your whole system. The project will then also change it's
name to Multics, to reflect it's unique multi-user capabilities. At
least if we get enough funding by Dunc-Tank, who is currently sponsoring
all our development efforts.
Reply to: