How to use DLL's in program so .NET isn't needed?

[Cymru]

I'm trying to build a program that doesn't need .NET to run.

I'm using all the original namespaces and a few others like threading, IO etc.

Is there a way I can add these (DLL's?) to the program so that I don't need to have a 100MB framework in my file?


Please post something simple that makes sense. I'm not that advanced with C#

Thanks

 

[Swan]

As far as I know, you need the .Net framework to run any application that is compiled with a .Net compiler, regardless of the includes or references you use. Most computers come with it installed anyway.

 

[Cymru]

I know, but this is what I mean.

When we use using system.IO;
we call the chunk of code for IO. If we could add that chunk of code to the program itself, then this would cancel all the other code for namespaces that we don't need, making the framework from 100MB to like 3MB.

 

[Swan]

I know, but this is what I mean.

When we use using system.IO;
we call the chunk of code for IO. If we could add that chunk of code to the program itself, then this would cancel all the other code for namespaces that we don't need, making the framework from 100MB to like 3MB.

I know what you said. What I said was that as far as I know, you can't.

 

[Govind]

Use a pre-.NET version of Visual Studio for a native Win32 executable.

 

[Flaming Idiots]

There is no pre-.NET version of C#. Just package the online installer for .NET with your program. It will download and install missing components only. For example, if they have .NET 3.0 installed, it will only install the .NET 3.5 dlls, which is about 10MB.

 

[Cymru]

Use a pre-.NET version of Visual Studio for a native Win32 executable.

There is no pre-.NET version of C#

There is no pre-.NET version of C#. Just package the online installer for .NET with your program. It will download and install missing components only. For example, if they have .NET 3.0 installed, it will only install the .NET 3.5 dlls, which is about 10MB.

The only problem is, if the firmware on the computer is 0, 1.0, 2.0 then the components needed for this are 100MB+
I've managed 60MB but still this is ridiculous and the program runs really slow.
The computer I need it to work on is 1.0 or zero I believe.

 

[Nullware]

Well, there's always switching languages so then you wouldn't have to rely on the .Net Framework at all PLUS it could then be cross-platform and possibly even more efficient.

 

[x⁹]

You can use Visual C++ 2008 (or any other version) to write win32 apps.
These don't require the .NET framework to run.

 

[Repentless]

I don't think you understand that a .NET framework dependent program is .NET FRAMEWORK DEPENDENT. It needs to be managed by something that can understand the Common Language Runtime. Managed code has it's drawbacks. Why are you using .NET if you don't want to use .NET?

 

[Jaco]

Rofl... if your going to write malicious code, do it in native code.

.Net is not going to be used for any commercial application anytime soon (I don't think any language running on a VM will be used by big companies until we all migrate to cloud computing).

 

[Nullware]

Rofl... if your going to write malicious code, do it in native code.

.Net is not going to be used for any commercial application anytime soon (I don't think any language running on a VM will be used by big companies until we all migrate to cloud computing).

Where does it say anything about malicious code?...

Java (a language that runs on a VM) is already used in some considerable commercial applications and also by many big companies (probably the most notable being IBM).

I do agree with you of course that native code is more efficient, however they seem to be getting to the point where in a lot of cases VM languages will perform sufficiently even where they didn't used to. Even then a cross-platform VM language like Java is much more useful then platform specific ones like .Net languages (don't even bring up Mono>_< ) so don't anyone fall in love with C#. It's a trap.:'(

 

[Repentless]

Where does it say anything about malicious code?...

It was a "why else would you need to do this?" sort of thing.

 

[war833]

Your program would be a humungous size. I don't think you can anyway, or it would have been mentioned more on the internet.

 

[x&#8313;]

Rofl... if your going to write malicious code, do it in native code.

.Net is not going to be used for any commercial application anytime soon (I don't think any language running on a VM will be used by big companies until we all migrate to cloud computing).

*points to the Expression suite and Visual Studio 2010*

 

[Govind]

This thread is so old... closed, lol.

 

[SuF]

Archived. >_>.