[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [DotGNU]__gc arrays
From: |
Marcus |
Subject: |
Re: [DotGNU]__gc arrays |
Date: |
Wed, 21 Apr 2004 21:14:34 -0500 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.6.51 |
From the description of the proposed compiler, it seems to be more restricted
than MS's Managed Extensions for C++ compiler. I do not see any mention of
the proposed compiler being able to (1) produce unmanaged code in the same
assembly as managed code and (2) consume existing unmanaged C++ code, both of
which are capabilities that MS's compiler has.
In (1), I'm talking about mixing unmanaged and managed code in the source,
calling between managed and unmanaged code using IJW ("It Just Works")
marshaling, and producing assemblies that contain a mixture of managed and
unmanaged code.
In (2), I'm talking about the ability of MS's compiler to consume existing C++
unmanaged shared libs (DLL's), so that intermediate C libraries are not
needed to use C++.
A compiler that merely allows the restricted subset of C++ that can be
meaningfully compiled to CIL seems to have little value without the
additional capabilities that MS's compiler has to leverage existing
libraries.
On Wednesday 21 April 2004 7:21 pm, Alex Stephens wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Apr 2004 07:51:24 +1000, Rhys Weatherley wrote:
> > Doing the managed bits of C++ is not difficult, as it is just C# bolted
> > onto the side of C. But the unmanaged bits will be very hard.
> >
> > > I think the Mono team are working on one...
> >
> > Do you have a URL for this?
>
> I read the following on Miguel de Icaza's web log at
> http://primates.ximian.com/~miguel/archive/2004/Apr-15.html
- Re: [DotGNU]__gc arrays, (continued)
- Re: [DotGNU]__gc arrays, Rhys Weatherley, 2004/04/20
- Re: [DotGNU]__gc arrays, Alex Stephens, 2004/04/20
- Re: [DotGNU]__gc arrays, Alex Stephens, 2004/04/21
- Re: [DotGNU]__gc arrays, Alex Stephens, 2004/04/21
- Re: [DotGNU]__gc arrays, Alex Stephens, 2004/04/21
- Re: [DotGNU]__gc arrays,
Marcus <=