Is there a .NET or C# to native x86 compiler?

[Andy Chau]

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

 

[Robert Jacobson]

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/

 

[Mountain Bikn' Guy]

Nice link. The prices seem high, but the tools look very interesting.

 

[Frank Lesser [LSW]]

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/

We are working on a .NET Native compiler. It will be part of LSW DotNet-Lab
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

 

[Cowboy \(Gregory A. Beamer\)]

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!
**********************************************************************

 

[Robert Jacobson]

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.

 

[Michael Giagnocavo [MVP]]

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

 

[Michael Pearson]

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

 

[Robert Jacobson]

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.

 

[Richard Grimes [MVP]]

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

 

[Frank Lesser [LSW]]

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

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

 

[Anoop M]

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