I would be surprised if MS wasn't intending to merge this in if it pans out the way they hope it will. Why else invest the resources to try and make it?
I know as someone who slings c# for the day job I'm super excited to try it out.
True, there are many research projects of Microsoft which ended up in production. Take the Linux Subsystem for Windows (Bash) for instance, or a little closer to home: Code contracts.
The Linux Subsystem for Windows isn't a great example. Folks in MSR Cambridge had Linux running on Windows circa Y2K. The Linux Subsystem today comes from a second effort using Drawbridge.
I've written an amateur, hobby-level engine, described here: https://mellinoe.wordpress.com/2017/01/18/net-core-game-engi.... This was more of a personal exercise for learning and experimenting than a serious attempt at game design, so the engine isn't that advanced.
For something more professional and polished, there is Xenko, which runs on CoreCLR for some of its non-mobile targets. https://xenko.com/
Also, Unity itself doesn't really run on Mono -- it just has a scripting layer that hosts Mono on top of its C++ core. Perhaps not a useful distinction for you, but I thought I'd mention it.
I don't know. From what I understand, this is still just a research project, and not something we have immediate plans to integrate into .NET Core. If we did that, though, I don't see why .NET Native wouldn't be considered as well.
I assume conflicting terminology: Unity calls the core of the engine "runtime", and that is written in C++. If you write C# logic, then that calls through fairly thin bindings into that.
At the same time the C#/.net programs are executed by the Common Language Runtime.
It seems like this relies for some of its safety guarantees on checks in (their fork of) the C# compiler. For example, owner non-copy guarantees seem to be enforced at the C# front end level rather than in the CLR. That could cause problems for getting it into CoreCLR (and much more so the desktop CLR), as this is meant to support multiple languages; relying on a specific language front-end for safe use of a feature feels at odds with the 'common language runtime' philosophy... It would be great to see it though!