At 06:24 PM 8/24/00 -0400, Bradley M. Kuhn wrote:
>Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > Having a solid and correct reference doc for the output bytecode is
> > probably the single most helpful thing we can do for folks writing things
> > that munch the bytecode.
>
>Actually, I don't think that munching Perl by
bkuhn wrote:
> >I *think* that the consensus is that we should make it easy for people who
> >want to port to the JVM, or the so-called ".NET Implementation Language".
> >As the JVM porter, I'd like my life easy, but I don't expect perl6 to hand
> >me a JVM implementation---I just want to right co
At 05:37 PM 8/17/00 -0400, Bradley M. Kuhn wrote:
>I don't think Microsoft's so-called ".NET Implementation Language" (I love
>how they appropriate words that are commonly used for other things; which as
>Simon noted makes searching hard anyway :) is really a "key" target for
>Perl6. For that mat
Simon Cozens wrote:
> I'm trying to find out some useful information on the Microsoft .NET
> Implementation Language, since everyone's raving about it and all I've
> seen is vapourware, glowing press releases and not a drop of code, and
> I'd rather see something a little more technical if it's wh
Simon Cozens wrote:
> I'm trying to find out some useful information on the Microsoft .NET
> Implementation Language, since everyone's raving about it and all I've
> seen is vapourware, glowing press releases and not a drop of code, and
> I'd rather see something a little more technical if it's wh
I'm trying to find out some useful information on the Microsoft .NET
Implementation Language, since everyone's raving about it and all I've
seen is vapourware, glowing press releases and not a drop of code, and
I'd rather see something a little more technical if it's what we're
going to be targett
