Rodrigo B. de Oliveira wrote: > On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 4:17 PM, Brian Frank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > projects now I can't imagine being that statically bound. My impression >> > is that C#/.NET has similar (if perhaps slightly lessened) restrictions. >> >> I don't think .NET is any less dynamic than the JVM - you can load >> assemblies and types on the fly just like Java. > > Assemblies are not subject to garbage collection.
A powerful distinction...classloaders can load arbitrary code and go away when that code and the classloader itself are dereferenced. If they couldn't we'd have a *devil* of a time supporting a JIT mode in JRuby. How does the DLR get around this when generating DynamicSites? - Charlie --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "JVM Languages" group. To post to this group, send email to jvm-languages@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jvm-languages?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
