J
jim
I may be wrong here, but it is my impression that the installation of the
..net framework leaves a computer with full programming abilities for that
package.
That's great -- for programmers.
..Net Framework does seem to have a heavy footprint -- where your value for
"footprint" may vary greatly.
The following is analogy to illustrate what would be a
"nice-to-have"......
Remember the Visual Basic Runtime libraries -- which came in flavors with
the file name prefixed VBRUN and suffixed 100,200,300 and 400. IIRC,
those runtime libraries did not contain the code for programming in Visual
Basic, but only contained the necessary runtime code for various programs
which were programmed using aspects of the full VB language.
A user could get the complete visual basic programming language, or could
get only the necessary runtime data link libraries containing the various
aspects of VB needed to allow a program programmed in VB program to run.
/end analogy
If the all of the above is true -- or even a significant amount of it is
true -- it would be 'nice to have' a similar type arrangement with the
..net framework platforms.
My question is: Is there such an arrangement available?
If not: is there a good reason why not and what is it?
jim
..net framework leaves a computer with full programming abilities for that
package.
That's great -- for programmers.
..Net Framework does seem to have a heavy footprint -- where your value for
"footprint" may vary greatly.
The following is analogy to illustrate what would be a
"nice-to-have"......
Remember the Visual Basic Runtime libraries -- which came in flavors with
the file name prefixed VBRUN and suffixed 100,200,300 and 400. IIRC,
those runtime libraries did not contain the code for programming in Visual
Basic, but only contained the necessary runtime code for various programs
which were programmed using aspects of the full VB language.
A user could get the complete visual basic programming language, or could
get only the necessary runtime data link libraries containing the various
aspects of VB needed to allow a program programmed in VB program to run.
/end analogy
If the all of the above is true -- or even a significant amount of it is
true -- it would be 'nice to have' a similar type arrangement with the
..net framework platforms.
My question is: Is there such an arrangement available?
If not: is there a good reason why not and what is it?
jim