microsoft shared source initiative
OK, so its a controversial subject, that does _not_ necessarily make this a troll...
Not really. Access to the source is so controlled that you cannot make any changes, recompile or do more than an inspection. In that case, how do you know they gave you the actual code?
I'm sure they don't give you the actual code. I'm sure they hire some guys to just write code that kinda looks like the real code to trick you.
Why would you need to compile it, anyway?
Brad Wilson (dotnetguy.techieswithcats.com)
Umm, Microsoft has never *claimed* that it's the actual Dotnet Framework code. Quite the opposite -- it describes the Rotor code as a different, experimental implementation that targets FreeBSD in addition to Windows. ("There are significant differences in implementation between this code and the code for Microsoft's commercial CLR implementation....")  Microsoft has been very upfront about these differences and the (many) limitations of the Rotor code. [2,3]
Ah, sorry -- I see now that the OP wasn't referring just to the Rotor project, but entire "Shared Source" program. However, the Shared Source license applies equally to the other projects, too -- you can compile, distribute and modify the code, just not for commercial purposes.
Actually, the Rotor code is *very* useful as a learning tool. It's a good example of a working CLR. The GC has been simplified, the JITter is simplified, but that just makes it a little easier to understand and experiment with it.
Fog Creek Home