On 02/06/02 Larry Wall wrote:
> Black pots and kettles aside, they bring up a lot of interesting issues
> that we have to think about if we're going to be more language-neutral
> than the CLR.
The main issue is that there is a point where too much generality
will make the VM too hard to target co
Also, reading
http://www.javalobby.org/clr.html
is a good antidote. Admittedly it's a bit Java-centric, but what
do you expect from a place named "javalobby"?
Black pots and kettles aside, they bring up a lot of interesting issues
that we have to think about if we're going to be more langu
Aaron Sherman:
# Ok, so I read Miguel's message:
#
# http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-hackers/2002-February/msg
# 00031.html
#
# I drank the cool-aid and now I find myself thinking... should Perl6
# compile down to its own byte-code or to Mono's CIL? Miguel
# feels this is
# the way to go, and
Ok, so I read Miguel's message:
http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-hackers/2002-February/msg00031.html
I drank the cool-aid and now I find myself thinking... should Perl6
compile down to its own byte-code or to Mono's CIL? Miguel feels this is
the way to go, and if Mono's bytecode is in fact s
