简体繁体 English

为什么monodevelop需要.NET 3.5框架才能在Windows上运行？

[英]why does monodevelop need the .NET 3.5 framework to run on windows?

原文 2009-09-12 22:50:20 3 2 .net/ windows/ monodevelop

it's kind of absurd(i think). 这有点荒谬（我认为）。 mono want to be a substitute to .NET, so why can't i run monodevelop with mono itself? mono希望替代.NET，所以为什么不能用mono本身运行monodevelop？ why do i need .NET for that? 为什么我需要.NET？

you can see what i'm talking about in this link: http://monodevelop.com/Download just choose MonoDevelop 2.2 Beta 1 then choose windows and you will see :-) 您可以在此链接中看到我在说什么： http : //monodevelop.com/Download仅选择MonoDevelop 2.2 Beta 1，然后选择Windows，您将看到:-)

thanks :-) 谢谢：-）

2 个解决方案

It's because monodevelop for windows is not just plain crossplatform port but something that takes deeper advantage of underlying operation system. 这是因为Windows的monodevelop不仅是纯跨平台端口，而且还充分利用了底层操作系统的优势。 There are some features developers wanted/needed to support under Windows and Mono was too constraining for them at this time (however it might and probably will change in the future). 开发人员希望/需要在Windows下支持一些功能，而Mono现在对他们来说太过局限了（但是将来可能会改变，将来可能会改变）。

I actually praise developers for doing what's right for their product and not religiously trying to make their software work with Mono on every platform. 我实际上称赞开发人员所做的事情适合他们的产品，而不是虔诚地尝试使他们的软件在每个平台上都可以与Mono一起使用。 if Microsoft .NET framework allows them to deliver on Windows better IDE now, then they got my thumbs up. 如果Microsoft .NET框架允许他们现在在Windows更好的IDE上交付，那么他们会竖起大拇指。

You can run MD it with Mono on Windows. 您可以在Windows上使用Mono运行MD it。 However, we shipped it as an installer for .NET because that's easier for the vast majority of users. 但是，我们将其作为.NET的安装程序提供，因为对于大多数用户而言，这更容易。 Most people have .NET, and on Windows it's better-optimized and more stable than Mono. 大多数人都拥有.NET，并且在Windows上，它比Mono更优化，更稳定。 Providing an installer for MD to run on Mono on Windows would not be an efficient use of our resources at this time, but that's certainly not to say we won't do it in future. 提供MD安装程序以在Windows上的Mono上运行将无法有效地利用我们的资源，但这并不是说我们将来不会这样做。